Mission :
To Regulate and Support Arizona Agriculture in
a manner that encourages farming, ranching
and agribusiness, while protecting consumers
and natural resources.

Arizona
Department of Agriculture
Annual Report
FY2013 – 2014

Table of Contents
Animal Services: Food Safety and Quality Assurance

1

Citrus Fruit and Vegetable Standardization & Federal State Inspection

9

Agricultural Consultation and Training

12

State Agricultural Laboratory

30

Environmental Services

35

Office of Pest Management

56

Plant Services: Pest Exclusion and Management

61

Animal Health and Welfare Program
Priorities and Oversight
The first priority of the Animal Health and Welfare Program (AHWP) is the prevention of certain diseases
of livestock, poultry, and commercial fish; and if established, their subsequent eradication. Relatedly,
AHWP protects the public from diseases which are transmissible from livestock to people. Field staff in
AHWP enforce all ownership and dominion laws as well as specific equine neglect and livestock cruelty
statutes. Additionally, via the State Emergency Response and Recovery Plan (SERRP), AHWP is involved
in a myriad of human and animal welfare contingencies. Lastly, the staff of the Meat and Poultry
Inspection Program is responsible for the oversight of livestock and poultry slaughtering as well as
processing.

Animal Health Programs
There were a total of 53 Administrate Orders issued this fiscal year. The vast majority were involved with
a scrapie disease trace that began in a goat in Mesa. Five other Administrative Orders were issued in
conjunction with suspected Equine Infectious Anemia horses or Tuberculosis cows, all of which were
defined as negative.
Ongoing state / federal / industry programs for the control and elimination of:
 Brucellosis
 Tuberculosis
 Pseudorabies
 Equine Infectious Anemia
 Scrapie
Ongoing state / federal / industry programs for the benefit of public health:
 Rabies control
 West Nile Virus and other equine encephalomyelitides (zoonoses)
 National Poultry Improvement Plan (control of multiple diseases)
 Animal Disease Traceability
 Multiple obligations under the Emergency Support Functions of SERRP

USDA Cooperative Agreements
Traditionally various animal health surveillance programs have been funded via grants with the United
States Department of Agriculture (USDA) / Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) /
Veterinary Service (VS). These have primarily included avian health, cattle health, and zoonotic
concerns.
April 1, 2014 began the new reporting year for USDA / AHPIS / VS. Their agreements fall into one of two
categories: Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) or Umbrella (general program disease surveillance).

Animal Disease Traceability System
The ADT cooperative agreement will be in furtherance of goals that have been in place for several years
– specifically that of improving trace back of animals after a given disease has been identified in livestock.
The goal is to be able to trace back to origin any disease within 48 hours of its recognition. This is a

1

challenging goal that will not be met for several years. Testing of the system began in the last months of
this fiscal year but has not been completed.

Umbrella Grant: Foreign Animal Disease (FAD) Surveillance Program
Early recognition of an FAD is essential to reducing the impact of a devastating disease outbreak.
Arizona Livestock Incident Response Team (ALIRT) investigations involving livestock were conducted during
this reporting period in conjunction with the Arizona Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory (AZVDL). All were
found to be indicative of plant toxicities or confirmed as such. No FADs were identified during the
investigations.
Arizona’s voluntary National Poultry Improvement Plan (NPIP) was recently established for hobbyist and
exhibition poultry and game bird breeding flocks and products. The state already has an NPIP program for
commercial producers. Even though the newly established NPIP program is voluntary, any person moving
hatching eggs, chicks, or older birds across state lines may be required to become NPIP-certified in order
to meet the other state’s entry requirements and the new Federal Interstate Movement Law requirements.
A swine component was added to the grant beginning June 15, 2014. The main objectives of this
component are to control the spread of and minimize the effects of swine enteric corona virus diseases.

Annual Licenses
Aquaculture
The Aquaculture Program regulates commercial operations that grow, transport, and process fish and
shrimp. These are the numbers of issued licenses: 19 transporters, 7 processors of fish and shrimp for
human consumption, 24 growing facilities, 6 research and educational facilities, and 4 operations that
charge a fee for fishing.

Feedlots
Twenty feedlot licenses were issued. This is only required for feedlots with 500 or more head of beef
cattle.

Inspection Data Tracking
During the majority of FY 2014, the Livestock Inspection Program tracked field activities through our
internal software system. Beginning in April 2014, we started tracking our field activities through the
State Forester’s WildCAD dispatch system. Since 2002, a number of activities have been closely
monitored and include such items as the number of inspections for health, the movement of range cattle,
cattle for processing, the number of investigations for animal care issues, stray animals / animals-atlarge, and livestock theft.

Surveillance Statistics
Currently, over 4,100 producers are approved to use the Self-Inspection Program. Livestock owners
understand the value of documenting animal movement and have accepted responsibility for intrastate
documentation through Self-Inspection certificates. Livestock Officers, Inspectors, and Deputies
document non-Self-Inspection activities such as the sale of range cattle and custom slaughter livestock.

2

Exhibitions, fairs, and shows have also been supportive of the “seasonal exhibition pass” implemented by
rule. Livestock theft investigation and enforcement cases remain at a low level, and Arizona continues to
maintain disease free status in all industry / state / federal cooperative disease control programs.

Arizona Livestock Incident Response Team Program
The Arizona Livestock Incident Response Team (ALIRT) program was implemented through legislative
authorization in FY 2005. Annual funding has been used to train and equip participating private
veterinarians to conduct investigations of unusual livestock disease events and to conduct outreach and
education to the livestock producers. Since its initiation, several investigations have been conducted and
in every case, the response resulted in a preliminary diagnosis within 48 hours, with laboratory diagnosis
confirmation soon after.
ALIRT is an emergency response program overseen by ADA and implemented through cooperation with
the University of Arizona’s Department of Veterinary Science Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory and
Cooperative Extension. USDA Wildlife Service and Veterinary Service actively participate in a program
designed to facilitate the potential diagnosis of unexplained livestock losses. Once a problem has been
discovered, various levels of response may be initiated. It all starts with the producer, local veterinarian,
and/or the local University of Arizona Cooperative Extension Office. If warranted, trained ALIRT private
veterinarians will respond to the scene, start the investigation, and collect samples. This is followed by a
conference call of the ALIRT steering committee that determines what, if any, additional actions are
necessary.
The cost of case work-up is covered by ALIRT program funding and includes expenses for the ALIRT
private veterinarian and other response personnel, as well as laboratory expenses related to the
diagnosis. Once a diagnosis is made and/or a treatment program is implemented, the expense becomes
the responsibility of the producer. The producer plays a key role in this process, starting with the
reporting of a problem in his herd. The producer also is important in preparing a herd history and
identifying any contributing factors that may assist in diagnosis. The ALIRT program only responds at the
invitation of the owner or manager and is available to individual producers who have significant
unexplained animal illnesses and/or death or if an area or region is having multiple suspicious livestock
losses. The ALIRT program was designed for the producer and all information collected remains
confidential. Emergencies are reported by calling the Arizona State Veterinarian at 602-542-4293 or the
University of Arizona Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory at 520-621-2356.

Meat and Poultry Inspection Program
The Meat and Poultry Inspection (MPI) Program is a federal-state cooperative program, funded 50% from
the state General Fund and 50% by USDA / Food Safety Inspection Service (FSIS). The program oversees
slaughter and processing of amenable meat animals and poultry which are offered for official inspection
prior to sale to the public. Operating to help ensure both food safety and truth in labeling to consumers,
inspectors visit regulated facilities on a daily basis. The program authority is established by state statutes
and rules, the federal Meat Inspection Act, and the federal Poultry Products Inspection Act.
State MPI personnel monitor general plant and equipment sanitation, processing sanitation, good
manufacturing practices during production, ante mortem and post mortem inspection at slaughter,
humane handling, Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) implementation, multi-ingredient
formulation, the use of approved labeling, net weights, and perform laboratory sampling programs as
requested. They also verify compliance with state and federal regulations prior to allowing the inspected
and passed triangle shaped “mark of inspection” to be applied to applicable products.

3

ADA inspectors receive training including HACCP inspection procedures, Sanitation Standard Operating
Procedures, and animal ante mortem and post mortem inspection procedures for disease.
Each day a plant operates, an MPI employee makes at least one unannounced visit to review production
activity. If discrepancies are found, they are documented and then discussed with plant management to
determine what corrective actions will be taken to ensure that no unwholesome or mislabeled product
leaves the plant. In slaughter plants, an MPI Inspector observes each animal presented for slaughter
both alive and at various stages during the carcass dressing procedure looking for any pathology that
may be present.
Unfit and/or unwholesome carcasses and parts are removed from the human food chain and decharacterized for inedible purposes. Humane handling is strictly enforced to ensure no animal is
mistreated or improperly stunned at slaughter.
Sanitation is observed and verified each day a plant operates by a pre-operational check of facility and all
equipment prior to the start of operations and/or operational sanitation checks to verify sanitation is
maintained during production.
HACCP verification is performed by reviewing the HACCP plan and all supporting documentation. Direct
observation or review of records is performed at all Critical Control Points. Corrective actions are taken
when a deviation occurs. Verification and reassessment is performed as required by regulation.
Labels are reviewed to show that they reflect the product is actually as the label states and that the label
meets all labeling requirements per regulation, including approval and allergen declaration. Formulation
is observed to verify the product is being made to meet product standards and is being made as
approved. Net weights are verified on certified scales weighing random lots of finished product to ensure
compliance.
Product samples are taken as requested by the Program Manager in selected establishments and
delivered to the State Agricultural Laboratory to be analyzed for the pathogen of concern. In the event
of non-compliance, establishments are notified by written non-compliance reports and regulatory control
actions are taken as needed to insure affected product does not reach the consumer.
Inspectors also periodically visit other processors known as “custom exempt,” which are firms that process
meats, game, and poultry for the personal consumption of the owner. These types of processors may not
sell meats to the general public without obtaining an official slaughter and processing license.
Over 650 food safety samples per year are submitted to the State Agricultural Laboratory to be analyzed
for E-coli 0157:H7, non-0157 Shiga Toxin E-coli (STEC), Salmonella, Listeria Monocytogenes, or violative
antibiotic residue. Additionally, antibiotic residue samples requested by USDA / FSIS and Tuberculosis
samples from suspect animals at slaughter were also taken. All of this information is entered each day by
the inspectors into a new computer database system mandated this year for state meat inspection
programs by FSIS called the Public Health Information System (PHIS). This new system required
hundreds of hours of training by the Program Manager and Supervisor to the inspection staff. This
included the initial set up and loading of the database and training of all staff in the use of the new
system.
Nearly 7,000 on-site food safety inspections where performed at official establishments and custom
exempt facilities this past year. No food borne illnesses or food safety recalls were reported in Arizona
official establishment this past year.

4

Meat and Poultry Compliance Program
Compliance is an integral part of the MPI Program. Arizona Revised Statutes provide the authority and
responsibility to protect consumers by assuring meat and poultry products are wholesome, not
adulterated, and properly labeled. In-commerce surveillance and reviews are conducted at distribution
centers, public warehouses, retail stores, restaurants, schools, prisons, and poultry exempt facilities.
Surveillance reviews are conducted to ensure industry compliance and consumer safety. These
surveillance reviews consist of product and facility assessments, food safety, sanitation, hazard control,
and labeling assessments.
Compliance also investigates food safety, misbranding, and other violations of law to protect public health
and to support criminal, civil, and administrative action. An investigation includes; planning, decisionmaking, evidence collection, identification, custody, interviews, photographic evidence, reports of
investigation, and investigative liaison with attorneys. The program is authorized to identify, detain, and
control adulterated, misbranded, illegally imported, and other illegal or unsafe meat and poultry products
so they do not reach consumers.
If requested, Compliance will assist with food safety related illness outbreaks and epidemiological
investigations. This consists of conducting product trace back and trace forward. The program
coordinates with USDA and various statewide health departments in conducting surveillance reviews and
investigations of retail stores and restaurants to ensure that meat and poultry products are wholesome
and properly labelled. Compliance will also conduct investigations of illegal slaughter and/or processing
operations statewide. Compliance has a database of over 100 licensees which include; warehouses,
distributors, jobbers, dead stock haulers, brokers, and meat storage.

Dairy & Dairy Products Inspection Program
Dairy inspection staff regulate all aspects of the dairy industry, from the dairy farm until products leave the
processing plant. Beginning at the farm, inspectors review plans submitted for construction of new farms
and the remodeling of existing farms. Farm inspections are conducted to check for compliance in sanitation,
milking procedures, equipment condition, and usage/labeling of drugs for animals, along with other
requirements. Water and milk cooling systems are reviewed and sampled for compliance with public health
standards.
Milk produced is sampled and tested for compliance with regulatory requirements. Bulk milk tankers, which
are used to collect and transport milk to processors, are inspected and licensed by the Dairy Inspectors.
These inspectors regulate dairy processing plants ranging from small cheese makers to plants processing
millions of pounds of milk per day. At plant inspections, inspectors review plant processing records, and
facilities are inspected for compliance with sanitation and maintenance requirements. Pasteurization
systems are tested quarterly and the controls are sealed by the inspector. If regulatory seals are broken
for maintenance or repairs, the plant must immediately notify the Dairy Program, and the equipment must
be retested and sealed by the inspector or a licensed industry sealer. Arizona milk processors use a variety
of approved pasteurization processes. These processes include the relatively simple batch pasteurizer and
proceed in complexity to systems called Ultra Pasteurization, which greatly extend the shelf life of dairy
products.
Inspectors also check packaging/bottling facilities and processes at dairy plants. Some facilities
manufacture containers and closures for dairy products. These facilities are also inspected and their
products are sampled and tested.
Finished milk and milk products are collected by Dairy Inspectors and submitted to the State Agricultural
Laboratory for testing. On average, almost 3,000 samples are collected and submitted each year.

5

Universal Sampling System
Regulations require regular testing of milk produced by “Grade A” dairy farms. In Arizona, dairy farms are
spread out over a large geographic area. Under the “Universal Sampling System,” milk hauler/samplers
are licensed by ADA after passing an exam. These hauler/samplers are also evaluated in the field by Dairy
Inspectors to ensure that their procedures are correct. The samples collected by licensed hauler/samplers
may be randomly tested by the state and the results used for official purposes. This system reduces the
personnel and driving time that would be required if the state had to collect the samples from each
individual farm.

Raw Milk Consumption
The majority of milk and milk products produced in Arizona are pasteurized. This means that the milk was
subjected to a process of heating and holding it at a specific temperature for a specified time period (161°
Fahrenheit for 15 seconds, for example) using approved equipment. This process is used to kill harmful
microorganisms which may be present.
A small amount of milk sold in Arizona is packaged and sold as raw milk for consumption. This milk is not
subjected to the pasteurization process. Although this milk is required to meet the same standards as
pasteurized milk, it can potentially contain pathogenic organisms. For this reason, raw milk for consumption
is required to have a warning statement on the label so consumers can be informed of the potential risk.
It is illegal, in Arizona, to sell raw milk for consumption without a license.

Interstate Shipment of Milk
Arizona participates in the National Conference on Interstate Milk Shippers (NCIMS). This program creates
uniform standards for evaluation of “Grade A” milk and milk products. This allows for milk to be transported
between states and accepted via reciprocity. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) certifies state
personnel, who then conduct audits, called ratings on producers and processors that wish to be listed as
Interstate Milk Shippers (IMS). The FDA periodically conducts check ratings to assure uniformity in the
system.
The NCIMS is also responsible for changes and updates to the Pasteurized Milk Ordinance (PMO), which is
the main document used to regulate “Grade A” milk and milk products. The NCIMS convenes every two
years to consider and vote on proposed changes. Arizona is a voting delegate at these conferences.

Egg & Egg Products Inspection Program
Egg Inspection Program staff provide inspection services to the public, industry, and federal government.
The Egg Inspection Program is funded entirely from a “mill fee” assessment from industry on each dozen
of eggs or pound of egg products sold in Arizona. The program has operated on industry assessments
since 1940.
Program staff inspect shell eggs and egg products from production at laying facilities, wholesalers, and
retail stores. Inspectors verify that products have been produced in accordance with statutes and are held
at temperatures of 45° Fahrenheit for eggs and 0° Fahrenheit for frozen egg products. Inspectors also
verify proper packaging, sanitary handling, dating, and weighing of eggs at production facilities,
warehouses, and retailers for products originating out-of-state.
Eggs processed or sold in Arizona are marked with mandatory expiration dates and have one of the shorter
code dating requirement at 24 days from packing. This helps to ensure that eggs continue to meet the
marked grade after they are purchased by consumers.

6

USDA Inspection and Grading Program
The Department also maintains cooperative programs with the USDA to provide “grade labeling” services
to the industry upon request. These cooperative programs also include surveillance and enforcement under
the federal Egg Products and Inspection Act, which regulates the movement and processing of certain
types of under-grade eggs to keep them from entering the market. ADA also enforces the Agricultural
Marketing Act of 1970.
Inspectors provide inspection services for USDA’s School Lunch Program for poultry purchases made on
behalf of school districts statewide. Warehouses receive truckloads and rail car deliveries of poultry
products that our inspectors check for proper handling in transit, including temperature checks.
Graders perform both temporary and resident (in-house) grading services to the egg industry in Arizona.
Seven full-time state employees are stationed at three packing plants and provide inspection / grading
services 365 days a year, 7 days a week. Under this USDA program, resident graders continually monitor
plant sanitation, processing temperatures, handling, and holding cooler temperatures. Eggs packed under
USDA program supervision are eligible to be marked with USDA shield grade marks or other USDA
identification. This USDA grade marks are valuable because many entities require it for sale, such as some
grocers, commercial foodservice, foreign countries, and the U.S. military.

Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station – Fixed Nuclear
Facility – Emergency Response
The Department is an integral part of the state and county response to any emergencies related to the
Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station located west of Phoenix. With three reactors, this is the largest
nuclear power plant in the U.S. with the capacity to serve millions of homes.
In cooperation with state, county, and federal agencies, ADA participates yearly in nuclear preparedness
drills. Every other year (exposure exercise) and every sixth year (ingestion exercise), federal agencies
grade the state response during drills and prepare a written evaluation. Every other year, an exposure
exercise is conducted with ingestion exercises every sixth year. A passing grade from cooperating agencies
is required for Palo Verde to maintain an operating license by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
For the 2014 exercise, the Department met all standards for emergency response. The food inspection
programs are integral to departmental participation in such drills, which also includes animal health
veterinarians and Livestock Officers.

7

FY 2014 Calls for Service from the Public
Inspections
Ownership
Butcher
Highway and Road Kill
Total
Welfare
Equine
Cattle
Goats
Sheep
Swine
Other
Total
Out of Place
Loose and Stray
Theft
Total
Other
Administrative
Dogs Chasing/Killing Livestock

8

4,252
1,367
72
5,691
817
188
50
6
18
1
1,080
858
25
883
650
10

Citrus, Fruit & Vegetable (CFV)
Standardization and Federal State Inspection
Arizona ranks third in the nation for overall production of fresh market vegetables. Arizona
acreage produced over 89.6 million cartons of fresh produce last year. Arizona ranks second in
the nation in production of iceberg lettuce, leaf lettuce, romaine lettuce, cauliflower, broccoli,
spinach, cantaloupes, and honeydews.
The top ten commodities, which account for 85% of the state’s total produce production, based
on carton count for fiscal year 2013 are as follows:
Iceberg lettuce
Romaine lettuce
Cantaloupe
Leaf lettuce
Spinach

23,448,232
17,229,697
9,507,459
5,392,560
4,760,135

Cabbage
Broccoli
Spring Mix
Cauliflower
Honeydew

3,785,527
3,325,700
3,317,097
2,956,785
2,669,039

As detailed below, the Citrus, Fruit and Vegetable Standardization Program and the Federal State
Inspection Program conducted 22,416 inspections last year. In addition, the Citrus, Fruit and
Vegetable Standardization Program issued 551 licenses to the produce industry.

Industry Funded -- Industry Supported
Both of these programs are entirely self-funded and receive no general fund allocations. Industry
supports the Citrus, Fruit and Vegetable Standardization Program through license fees and carton
assessments, which are reviewed monthly and adjusted yearly. The Federal State Inspection
Program is entirely funded on a fee-for-service basis.
The Citrus, Fruit and Vegetable Advisory Council, by statute, is comprised of governor-appointed
citrus producers from specified counties, fruit or vegetable producers from specified counties, an
iceberg lettuce producer from Yuma County and an Arizona apple, grape, or tree fruit producer.
This group of leaders of their respective industries meets quarterly with staff of the Citrus, Fruit
and Vegetable Program to review program policy and budgetary items.

Standardization Program
Arizona citrus, fruit and vegetable producers rely on the Arizona Department of Agriculture for
increasing the potential for domestic and international marketing, protecting against exporting,
importing, selling of substandard produce by development, and enforcement of uniform
standards. It is the Citrus, Fruit and Vegetable Standardization Program (CFV) that assists the
Arizona produce industry, including growers, shippers, contract packers, dealers and commission
merchants in complying with product quality standards.

9

Federal-State Inspection Program
This year the Citrus, Fruit and Vegetable Standardization Program successfully completed its
fourteenth year managing the Federal State Inspection Service, Fresh Produce Inspection and
Terminal Market Programs in Nogales, Phoenix, and Yuma under a cooperative agreement with
United States Department of Agriculture. Mandatory as well as voluntary United States
Department of Agriculture inspections are performed by Arizona Department of Agriculture staff
(federal state inspectors) and take place primarily at the shipping point (point of origin), port-of-entry
(Arizona-Mexico border) or the terminal market (point of destination).
This federal program administered by the department also enforces United States import
requirements and marketing order restrictions at the international border between Arizona and
Mexico. Significantly, Nogales is the second busiest port-of-entry for produce in the United
States. Last year, department staff inspected at total of 23.3 million packages, with more than
2.5 million packages of field tomatoes, 641 thousand packages of greenhouse tomatoes, 1.9
avocadoes and 16.1 million lugs of table grapes imported from Mexico and a variety of other
commodities, including watermelons, peppers, cucumbers, squash, onions and citrus.
It is important to note that the Citrus, Fruit and Vegetable Program and the Shipping Point
Inspection Program in Yuma and Phoenix developed cost-reduction efficiencies for Arizona’s
agriculture industries through the cross-training of department inspectors to handle both state
and federal inspections as well as phytosanitary certifications.

Third Party Audit Program
At the request of Arizona fresh produce industry representatives, Arizona Department of
Agriculture, along with other western State Departments of Agriculture and the United States
Department of Agriculture, developed a Third Party Audit Program within the existing framework
of USDA Agricultural Marketing Service Federal State Inspection. The resulting program is
designed to audit the Good Agricultural Practices and Good Handling Practices for the produce
industry. Federally licensed state inspectors perform these audits at industry’s request.

Arizona Leafy Green Products Shipper Marketing Agreement (AZ LGMA)
In September 2007 Arizona farmers came together to raise the bar for food safety. The produce
industry solicited for the first Marketing Agreement in the history of the Arizona Department of
Agriculture. As a result the Arizona Leafy Green Products Shipper Marketing Agreement (AZ
LGMA) was formed. This agreement was renewed for an additional four years in October 2011.
The general purpose of this Marketing Agreement is to enable shippers of leafy green products to
engage in mutual help and continue the production of high quality leafy green products grown in
this State. The primary purpose of this Marketing Agreement is to authorize signatory shippers to
certify safe handling, shipment and sale of leafy green products to consumers by adopting leafy
green best practices and by using an official mark. The Marketing Agreement will permit the
advertisement and promotion of the use of the official mark and the education of consumers
about the meaning of the official mark.
Members of the AZ LGMA are working collaboratively to protect public health by reducing
potential sources of contamination in Arizona-grown leafy greens. Leafy green products of the AZ
LGMA include: iceberg lettuce, romaine lettuce, green leaf lettuce, red leaf lettuce, butter lettuce,
baby leaf lettuce (i.e., immature lettuce or leafy greens), escarole, endive, radicchio, spring mix,
spinach, cabbage, kale, arugula or chard.

10

Assessments on signatories to the Arizona Leafy Green Products Shipper Marketing Agreement
are based on cartons or carton equivalents of affected commodities sold. Shipper means a
person that engages in shipping, transporting, selling or marketing leafy green products under
his or her own registered trademark or label or a person who first markets the leafy green
products for the producer. It does not mean a retailer.
Currently the AZ LGMA has 35 signatory shippers that represent 97% of the volume leafy greens
grown in Arizona. AZ LGMA membership requires verification of compliance with the accepted
food safety practices through mandatory government audits. University and industry scientists,
food safety experts and farmers, shippers and processors developed these food safety practices.
These companies have committed themselves to sell products grown in compliance with the
Arizona Metrics, food safety practices accepted by the AZ LGMA Marketing Committee.

Department Pride in the Statewide Gleaning Project
An Executive Order was issued to extend the Arizona Statewide Gleaning Project. Gleaning is the
harvesting of surplus crops, and the governor’s project distributes these gleaned crops to those
in need. The Arizona Department of Agriculture plays an integral role in the statewide gleaning
effort in that Citrus, Fruit and Vegetable Standardization Program inspectors notify key food bank
officials of upcoming seasons, and identify potential crop donations. Participating producers are
then able to donate surplus crops, instead of discarding them, by allowing volunteers, inmate
labor and food bank staff to glean their fields. Several state agencies support other portions of
the program and this combined effort resulted in over 22.6 million pounds of produce collected
and distributed to food banks and other organizations serving those in need during this past year.

11

Agricultural Consultation & Training (ACT)
The Agricultural Consultation and Training Program is an innovative compliance assistance program unique
to an agricultural regulatory agency. This program embraces the Arizona Department of Agriculture’s (ADA)
goal of encouraging farming, ranching and agribusiness, while protecting consumers and natural resources
by utilizing a non-enforcement approach. ACT is not affiliated with any of ADA’s enforcement programs,
allowing staff members to provide a formal means by which the regulated agricultural community may
request compliance assistance without regulatory intervention. Agricultural Consultation and Training
serves Arizona’s diverse agricultural community by promoting agriculture, conducting training and
increasing voluntary compliance and awareness of regulatory requirements and providing agricultural
conservation education through the following compliance assistance and education programs:




Pesticide Safety
Air Quality
Agricultural Conservation Education

The Agricultural Consultation & Training Program also houses the following programs:









On-Farm Energy Audit Implementation Program
Good Agricultural Practices/Good Handling Practices Food Safety Program
Livestock & Crop Conservation Grant Program
Specialty Crop Block Grant Program
Arizona Citrus Research Council
Arizona Iceberg Lettuce Research Council
Arizona Grain Research and Promotion Council
Agricultural Employment Relations Board

Pesticide Safety Compliance Assistance
The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Worker Protection Standard (WPS) is designed to reduce the
risk of pesticide exposure to pesticide handlers and agricultural workers. The WPS includes requirements
for pesticide safety training, notification of pesticide applications, use of personal protective equipment,
restricted entry intervals following pesticide application, decontamination supplies and emergency medical
assistance. Staff of the Agricultural Consultation and Training (ACT) Program assist growers in complying
with federal and state Worker Protection Standards by providing pesticide safety training for pesticide
handlers and agricultural workers, developing pesticide information resources in English and Spanish, and
performing mock inspections to assist farm and nursery owners in complying with pesticide regulations.

Pesticide Safety Training
Among the more popular services provided by ACT staff are free pesticide safety training courses. Course
attendees learn how to work safely around pesticides or in areas where pesticides have been applied and
the steps to recognize, respond to, and prevent pesticide exposure. Agricultural employees who possess
this knowledge can reduce their risk of pesticide-related illnesses and injuries at the worksite.
The training courses are provided in English and Spanish and are open to anyone who would like to attend.
The courses are also promoted to safety trainers who want to observe a training to gather ideas for their
own sessions and growers who would like to learn more about state and federal laws pertaining to pesticide

12

safety. Licensed and certified pesticide applicators may also attend to receive two hours of Continuing
Education toward the renewal of their license.
During FY 2014, ACT staff presented pesticide safety training to 897 people who were employed by 144
agricultural operations, landscaping companies, tribal communities and governmental agencies.
A two-hour pesticide handler course was provided to 754 people who planned to mix, load, and apply
pesticides. The course was presented in English to 442 people and in Spanish to 312. Of the handlers, 18
licensed applicators participated to receive an EPA Pesticide Training Verification card and Continuing
Education hours toward the renewal of their licenses.
In addition to the pesticide handlers, 143 people attended a one-hour pesticide safety course designed for
agricultural workers. Agricultural workers perform tasks such as weeding, irrigating, and harvesting crops
in areas where pesticides have been applied in the previous 30 days. Fourteen of the agricultural workers
who attended this training received the information in English and 129 received the information in Spanish.
The following chart shows the percentage of attendance in each type of training.

Percentage of Attendance
by Job Type and Language
Pesticide Handlers (English)
2%

14%
Pesticide Handlers (Spanish)
49%

Agricultural Workers (English)

35%

Agricultural Workers (Spanish)

During this reporting cycle, ACT Pesticide Safety Program staff also presented two, 4-hour classes on
pesticide safety and equipment calibration to 45 landscape professionals. The classes were presented at
the Arizona Landscape Contractors’ Association office in Scottsdale. The pesticide safety and calibration
class is one of twelve courses offered annually through the Arizona Landscape Contractors’ Association
(ALCA). The series of courses focuses on important landscape topics such as plant identification, pruning
techniques, irrigation and sod. Attendees take on-line exams following each course. After passing each of
the twelve courses and exams, attendees become Arizona Certified Landscape Professionals.

13

Arizona Pesticide Safety Train-the-Trainer Workshops

Each year, staff in the Arizona Department of Agriculture’s (ADA)
Agricultural Consultation and Training Program work with industrial
hygienists from ADA’s Environmental Services Division to present pesticide
safety train-the-trainer workshops.
The workshops, which are presented in English and Spanish, are designed
to increase knowledge on human health and environmental concerns when
working with pesticides and steps to reduce exposure to agrichemicals.
Important pesticide safety information such as pesticide label
comprehension, personal protective equipment, environmental protection,
restricted entry into treated areas and pesticide emergency response is
included.

Train‐the‐Trainer workshop
attendees plan their final
presentation assignment.

Hands-on training techniques and group activities are used to demonstrate
ways to extend pesticide safety information to pesticide handlers and
fieldworkers.

Between July 1, 2013 and June 30, 2014, the team of instructors presented
13 workshops to 180 people in Yuma, Phoenix, and Pipe Springs, Arizona. In addition to attending the 6hour course, attendees are required to provide a 5-minute safety presentation and pass a 50-question
trainer exam before becoming a certified trainer. This year, 165 people completed and passed all three
elements of the trainer requirements. They each received Arizona Pesticide Safety Trainer Certificates,
which are valid for 3-years.

Pesticide Applicator Licensing Exam Events
In addition to presenting pesticide safety training programs, ACT staff administers private and commercial
applicator licensing exams to large groups working outside the Phoenix area.
During FY14, ACT staff was invited to provide six pesticide applicator exam events in five locations. The
events were held in Cottonwood, Tempe, Willcox, Pipe Springs (Kaibab-Paiute Tribe) and Gallup, New
Mexico (Navajo Nation).
Many of the 95 test takers who participated in these events were state, federal and tribal government
employees who planned to use pesticides in watershed restoration projects and invasive weed control
programs within their communities. About half of the people who attended the event in Willcox worked on
farms in Cochise and Graham counties.

14

Pesticide Safety Teaching Tools, Informational Resources, and Training
Modules
ACT staff develops new and adapts existing teaching tools,
informational resources, and training modules. These
materials are used during safety events and are distributed
to agricultural employers, employees, health care
professionals, and outreach educators.
In Fall 2013, the ACT Pesticide Safety Program Coordinator
designed two interactive Worker Protection Standard
compliance modules.
The first module focused on pesticide application and
emergency medical information that must be readily available
to employees at an accessible central location. The second
module addressed the Arizona pesticide safety training
requirements and includes information on training
recordkeeping, frequency of training, and trainer
qualification. The modules were demonstrated to 195 people
who attended the Arizona Department of Agriculture’s
Annual Recertification and Training Courses in Yuma, Safford
and Maricopa.

ACT staff developed an interactive, on‐line
compliance module to describe the pesticide
application and emergency medical information
that must be available at a central location.

The two modules are the first of a set of 10 that will be placed on the department’s website to serve as
on-line pesticide safety resources for the agricultural community.

Air Quality Compliance Assistance
Regulated Agricultural Best Management Practices
The Regulated Agricultural Best Management
Practices (RABMP) program has completed its tenth
year of providing air quality compliance assistance to
Arizona’s agricultural community through a
cooperative agreement with the Arizona Department
of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). The RABMP
program provides a means by which Arizona’s
agricultural community can request compliance
assistance without incurring regulatory intervention
for applicable federal, state and local regulation.
The RABMP program goal is to provide the regulated
agricultural community with the necessary resources
to achieve compliance with applicable air quality
standards. Through innovation and enhanced outreach and education, the program is projecting increases

15

in the number of individuals reached. This projected growth is due to an increase in outreach for growers
in the new West Pinal County Nonattainment Area.
The air quality program staff regularly participates in local air quality stakeholder’s meetings such as:











EPA Region IX Best Achievable Control Measures (BACM)
ADEQ’s Regional Haze and Natural Events meetings
Maricopa County Rule 310 and 310.01 public process
Maricopa County Association of Governments (MAG) Air Quality Technical Committee
Meetings for the EPA 5% reduction of particulate matter (PM10) plan
Pinal County PM10 reduction stakeholder group
Yuma County stakeholder groups for the Ag BMP program
Governor’s Agricultural Best Management Practices Committee Technical Work Group
CAFO Education Group
State and County Farm Bureau

The federal Clean Air Act requires that air pollutant emissions be controlled from all significant sources in
areas that do not meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Air Quality regulations for agricultural
dust in certain parts of Arizona require farms, nurseries, dairies/feed lots and irrigation districts to
implement agricultural best management practices (BMPs) to help reduce particulate matter (PM10).
Agricultural BMPs are feasible and effective practices that have been evaluated for their efficiency,
applicability, likelihood for implementation and adopted into state regulation.
This past year the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concurred with the ADEQ’s exceptional events
demonstrations. These demonstrations show the EPA that PM10 exceedances in Maricopa County were
the result of natural or exceptional events that could not otherwise be controlled. With the concurrence,
each of the monitors in the Maricopa County network will have had three or fewer PM10 exceedances for
calendar years 2010, 2011 and 2012.
Subsequently, The EPA proposed to approve the 2012 Five Percent Plan for the Maricopa County
Nonattainment Area because the plan shows annual reductions of PM10 emissions of at least 5% between
2007 and 2012 and demonstrates attainment by December 31, 2012.
Examples of BMPs include:
 Using a track-out control system, helping to remove mud and soil from tires of farm equipment
before they enter a paved public road.
 Planting and tillage based on soil moisture is scheduling activities to coincide with precipitation or
the application of water.
 A wind barrier is constructing a fence or
structure, or provides a woody vegetative
barrier by planting a row of trees or shrubs,
perpendicular or across the prevailing wind
direction.
 Combining tractor operations.
 Using drag equipment instead of push
equipment to maintain pens.
 Using a water misting system that projects a
cloud of very small water particles onto the
manure surface.
 Reducing vehicle speeds on unpaved farm
roads to 20 mph or less.
 Installing engine speed governors on feed
Combining Tractor Operations
trucks that limit speeds to 15 mph.

16

Outreach and air quality education is provided to Arizona’s agricultural community in an effort to reduce
regional dust pollution through:
 On-site visits to farms and nurseries to make site specific assessments and recommendations that
can ensure compliance with air quality regulations. These visits include discussions of the Ag BMP
program and the BMPs available for tillage and harvest, non-cropland, and cropland categories.
For fiscal year 2014 there were 132 visits made to producers to promote the program.
 Agricultural BMP training for farm workers includes the various techniques that employers can use
to comply with state and local regulations and the different ways field workers can get involved in
reducing agricultural air pollution. A video is provided during training, in English and Spanish, which
explains how dust affects our health, where agricultural dust can come from and what to do if
excessive dust is reported to a regulatory agency. In fiscal year 2014 there were 18 trainings,
presentations, and promotions of the program to agricultural workers and representatives.
Outreach and training reached 2,151 participants.
 E-mail notifications of high wind advisories are sent to the regulated agricultural communities of
Maricopa, Yuma, and Pinal Counties. This notification system alerts the producer to possible PM10
exceedances and stagnant air conditions. During these forecasted conditions, producers are
encouraged to implement their dust control action plans. During fiscal year 2014, 11 forecasts
were sent to 280 producers in Maricopa, Yuma, and Pinal Counties.
 Providing “Air Quality & Agriculture – Air Quality in Action”, a quarterly air quality newsletter to the
agricultural community. This newsletter features articles on air quality issues impacting all areas of
agriculture in all parts of the state, a “Featured BMP” column, and contact information to obtain
agricultural air quality information or to schedule an on-site visit. In fiscal year 2014, 1,117 copies
of the newsletter were sent to 279 stakeholders in Maricopa, Yuma, and Pinal Counties.
 Publication of various articles and ads in industry periodicals, providing information on updates in
air quality regulations, agricultural dust during high wind events and changes in the RABMP
program. In fiscal year 2014, 12 articles and ads were published with a readership of 18,073
people.
 The air quality program worked with other agencies such as ADEQ and county farm bureaus to
address compliance issues needing correction. These include public complaints, track-out issues,
and violations. During fiscal year 2014, four issues were corrected.
During fiscal year 2014, the Governor’s Ag Best Management Practices Committee and the Technical
Workgroup was reconvened to address EPA’s recommendations for the AgBMP Program and create a
foundation for a program in Pinal County. The EPA felt that the BMP definitions lacked “specificity” and
“enforceability” due to the lack of a mandatory reporting system. The workgroup was tasked to redefine
the BMPs and create a reporting system to capture the needed information that will meet EPA’s request.
The Governor’s Ag Best Management Practices Committee did suspend the March 31, 2014 reporting
deadline for producers. Currently both the workgroup and committee are discussing with the EPA and
ADEQ a program for Pinal County that will help bring Pinal County into attainment.

17

In 2005, the Yuma Ag BMP program was implemented
to address the PM10 problem in Yuma County, but no
outreach materials were available. Outreach to the
community began in fiscal year 2010 to promote
agriculture’s proactive approach to addressing the
PM10 problem in Yuma County. In fiscal year 2014
outreach continued by meeting producers, attending
industry functions and reestablishing stakeholder
meetings. Agriculture industry members met with
ADEQ and EPA through the local Natural Resources
Conservation District to discuss the “next” steps in
reaching attainment status.

Agricultural Conservation Education Program
In September 2002, the Arizona Department of Agriculture’s (ADA) Agricultural Consultation and Training
Program (ACT) began assisting the agricultural community through a
partnership with the United States Department of Agriculture’s Natural
Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). Since its inception this partnership
has evolved into the Agricultural Conservation Education Program (ACEP).
The ACEP Coordinator assists agricultural producers’ efforts to protect the
environment through compliance assistance outreach and education; helps
conserve the State’s natural resources through Conservation Technical
Assistance (CTA), and assists producers design and implement conservation
practices with cost share assistance from Farm Bill Programs through NRCS.
CTA provides the technical capability, including direct conservation planning,
design, and implementation assistance, to help farmers apply conservation
practices on the land. This assistance is
provided to agricultural producers as well as
individuals, groups, and communities who
make natural resource management decisions on private, tribal, and other
non-federal lands. The NRCS assists the Natural Resource Conservation
Districts (NRCD) with meeting their conservation goals. The ACEP
Coordinator was primarily assigned to the NRCS Avondale Field Office which
supports the majority of Maricopa County and four NRCD offices: Agua
Fria/New River, Buckeye Valley, Gila Bend, and Wickenburg. The ACEP
Coordinator works directly with the NRCS Environmental Quality Incentives
Program (EQIP) which provides voluntary conservation programs for farmers
and ranchers to promote agricultural production and environmental quality.
The resource concerns addressed with the 2014 EQIP applications include
Air Quality, for both particulates and greenhouse gases; Soil Condition
and/or Erosion; Water Quality and Quantity. EQIP offers financial and technical assistance for the
installation and implementation of structural and management practices on eligible agricultural land. The
ACEP Coordinator continued to assist the NRCS Avondale Field Office with project and status reviews, soil
loss evaluations, cultural resource surveys, highly erodible land determinations and administrative
management of EQIP applications and contracts for federal fiscal years 2010 to current.

18

Educational Outreach through the Multi-Agency CAFO Education Group
The ACEP Coordinator also meets compliance assistance goals through
outreach opportunities which include Arizona’s Concentrated Animal
Feeding Operations (CAFO) Education Group. The CAFO Education Group
is a project between producer organizations and state and federal
agencies committed to providing education and compliance assistance to
Arizona’s CAFO. Members include representatives from the Arizona Cattle
Feeder’s Association, United Dairymen of Arizona (UDA), Arizona and
Maricopa County Farm Bureaus, NRCS, Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) Region 9, several NRCD’s, The University of Arizona Cooperative
Extension, ADEQ and ADA. ACEP chairs the CAFO Education Group and
facilitates meetings.
The ACEP Coordinator also directly assisted CAFO owner/operators with meeting state and federal water
quality regulations. Utilizing resources through NRCS, the ACEP Coordinator further helped CAFO producers
by developing Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans, completing soil tests for compaction and
permeability, and assisting with the planning for structural practices for wastewater utilization.
Further educational outreach provided by ACEP included maintaining and updating The CAFO Ready
Reference Guide. This concise guide is a collection of the various county, state, and federal agencies that
regulate and/or offer compliance programs for Arizona’s CAFO’s. Other outreach is conducted by answering
producer and consumer questions and providing information through letters, emails, faxes and phone calls.
The total number of people reached through outreach and educational materials for fiscal year 2014 was
3711.

*Special Note: The federal funding for this program expired on August 31, 2014, just two months into the
2015 fiscal year.

On-Farm Energy Audit Implementation Program
In March of 2013, the Arizona Department of Agriculture’s (ADA) Agricultural Consultation and Training
(ACT) renewed the contract with the USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) to provide
On-Farm Energy Audits at no cost to producers statewide. Energy has been a new concern with the cost
of energy increasing. The first step in reducing energy costs is to have an audit completed to identify
where to reduce energy use. Producers can cut their input costs, maintain production, protect natural
resources and reduce dependence on fossil fuels by conserving their energy use. These audits may be
completed on farms, nurseries, concentrated animal feeding operations and ranches to evaluate energy
consumption.

19

Currently, the program consists of two types of audits:
Headquarter and Landscape.
Headquarter Energy
Audits consists of analyzing farm buildings, which
includes lighting, insulation, ventilation, water systems,
and heating that are used on dairies, feedlots, and
greenhouses. Landscape Energy Audits consist of
analyzing agronomic operations such as crop and
pasture management, forestry practices, manure
handling, irrigation, and other farming activities.
The On-Farm Energy Audit Implementation Program
provides outreach by conducting on farm visits and
educational workshops, trainings and presentations
during industry functions. Both the on farm visits and group presentations include distributing program
information, explanation of the audit process and providing information of possible cost share programs
from agency partners.

20

Outreach and education for fiscal year 2014 included:






On-Site visits including a discussion of the
program and its benefits, the steps involved in
the auditing process, and what is expected from
the producer. There were 104 visits to local
producers to promote the program and its
benefits.
The program was promoted during various
agricultural industry functions and meetings.
Industry members include the local and State
Farm Bureaus, Arizona Nursery Association,
United Dairymen of Arizona, and local Natural
Resources Conservation Districts. In fiscal year
2014 there were 23 promotional opportunities
that reached 2,454 participants.
Publication of various articles and ads in industry
periodicals provided information on the program, its benefits, and how to apply. In fiscal year 2014,
five articles and ads were published with a readership of 5,241 people.

The second feature of the On-Farm Energy Audit Implementation Program is working with a third party
vendor to complete the energy audit. EnSave is the auditing company conducting the audits. EnSave is a
NRCS certified Technical Service Provider (TSP) and follows the American Society of Agricultural and
Biological Engineers (ASABE) Standards. ACT Staff performs data collection for the auditing company and
gathers the needed information to complete the audit. Data includes information on motors, pumps,
generators, compressors, lighting, ventilation, and irrigation systems on the property. This data is used in
the process of analyzing the producer’s energy use and developing the recommendations in the audit.








ACT Staff completed training and has been certified as data
collectors for both Headquarters and Landscape Energy Audits.
This training enabled ACT Staff to perform the onsite data
collection for an energy audit, providing support for NRCS
Agricultural Energy Management Plans, Rural Development REAP
grant and loan applications, and other energy efficiency programs
for producers.
In fiscal year 2014 ACT Staff received 11 applications for On-Farm
Energy Audits. All applications must be submitted to the Arizona
Department of Agriculture to be eligible for the program. The
applications were reviewed and evaluated to determine whether
the applicants would receive Headquarter or Landscape audits.
Eleven applications were submitted to EnSave for audits to be
completed in FY14. These included 7 applications for Headquarter
Audits on concentrated animal feeding operations and
greenhouses. Four applications were for Landscape Audits to be
conducted on farms and ranches. Of the 11 applications, 3 were
canceled upon review because facilities were already energy efficient and no recommendations could
have been made.
Nine qualified applicants from FY14 and nine qualified applicants from FY13 were carried over. Of
these, twelve audits were completed. Six audits were Landscape Audits on farms and ranches, six
were Headquarter Audits on dairies and greenhouses and six operations chose not to go forward. The
final audit report includes information on current energy use, recommendations to increase the facilities’
energy efficiency, and possible cost share programs available to help make the recommended energy
efficiency upgrades.

21

Good Handling Practices/Good Agriculture Practices
(GHP/GAP)
The Agricultural Consultation and Training (ACT) Program of the Arizona
Department of Agriculture (ADA) through a United States Department of
Agriculture – Agricultural Marketing Service (USDA-AMS), Specialty Crop Block
Grant Program grant, has entered into a cooperative agreement with The
University of Arizona Cooperative Extension to develop and make available a
course for workshop training. This is the third year of this program which has
been developed for growers and producers, processors, harvesters,
warehouses, transportation lines, and gardeners of fresh fruit, vegetables, and
tree nuts, desiring to request and pass a food safety audit and sell their produce
to restaurants and other wholesale accounts. Good Handling Practices (GHP) refers to post-harvest
operations, while Good Agriculture Practices (GAP) refers to on-farm operations and systems.
This training is used to develop a food safety plan or a food safety program leading to passing an audit for
GHP/GAP certification. Attendees of this training will not be certified at the end of this class, but will have
the tools required to develop a food safety program and request an audit for certification. GHP/GAP, a
voluntary program of the USDA-AMS, requires growers, processors, and those transporting these products,
to increase their awareness of food safety hazards, to mitigate these hazards, and to monitor and document
their actions.
Certification by the USDA, ADA or a third party may be required by the buyers or markets for growers to
sell their produce. This certification assures the buyers that the growers have protocols and procedures in
place to minimize food safety risks. The GAP and GHP audits focus on best agricultural practices to verify
that fruits and vegetables are produced, packed, handled, and stored in the safest manner possible to
minimize risks of microbial food safety hazards.
Dr. Kurt Nolte, a University of Arizona Cooperative Extension Agent researching lettuce production in Yuma,
has developed two half-day training sessions which were taken to various agricultural locations around the
state. These workshops have been presented to nearly 400 individuals in different areas of the state
including Yuma, Tucson, Phoenix, Flagstaff, Casa Grande, Willcox, Nogales, Bullhead City, Snowflake,
Cottonwood, and Prescott. Attending growers have been diversified as to their experiences, farm sizes and
crops. Producers of lettuce, apples, pistachios, tomatoes, chili, dried beans, as well as greenhouse
vegetable operators and other growers have attended these workshops. Warehousing, storage and
transportation operation representatives have also attended.
There are several different auditing programs, mostly industry driven. USDA’s GHP/GAP program is the
most basic, entry level food safety program, while Global and Harmonized GAPs are more restrictive and
detailed. The Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement (LGMA) between California and Arizona may be the
most restrictive and complex.
The GHP/GAP training, as developed and presented by Dr. Nolte, is delivered by components and designed
to reach the appropriate audience. Each component may be for an individual audit or may be combined
with other components.
All audits begin with a General Questions Section, (below left), regarding the food safety program,
worker health and hygiene, and traceability.

22





Component 1 is the Farm Review and delves into sewage, irrigation water, animals and wildlife,
manure usage, soils and traceability.
Component 2 is Field Harvest and Field Packing Activities. This section questions field
sanitation and hygiene, field harvesting and transportation, and traceability.
Component 3 is House Packing Facility and reviews the packing house facility conditions, wash
packing lines’ water use and sources, packing house worker health and hygiene, general
housekeeping, pest control, and traceability.
 Component
4
is
for
Storage
and
Transportation and pertains to large warehouses
that receive, store and ship fresh produce. These
topics include product, containers, pallets, pest
control, ice and refrigeration, transportation, worker
health & personal hygiene, and traceability.
 Component 6 is Wholesale Distribution
Center/Terminal Warehouses and reviews the
receiving/storage facility temperature control, pest
control, repacking and reconditioning product,
worker
health
and
personal
hygiene,
shipping/transportation and traceability.
 Component 7 is Preventive Food Defense and
takes into account the facility security for both
employees and visitors, and security procedures of
the facility.
 There is no component 5 which was titled
Traceability, as the traceability factors were
incorporated into each of the individual components.

A grower may want to audit for Component 1 only, if the harvesting and packing, transportation and storage
are contracted out. Or, the farm may perform its own harvesting and packing and will audit for Components
1 and 2. The warehouses may only want certification in Components 4 and/or 6. Component 3 is used for
those facilities that wash and pack the produce in a dedicated building. It is possible that a business will
encompass all of the components and will audit for each section or audit for a combination or for only one.
There is no cost to attend the workshop or for training materials, which includes monitoring logs and forms.
ADA will offset the cost of the audit with a cost share/grant up to 75% of the cost of the audit, to a
maximum of $750.00.
There is follow up contact to growers and those attending the workshops in offering assistance in
developing a food safety program leading to the audit and certification. One-on-one consultation, at the
farm or operations location, is available and encouraged for those with plans to develop a food safety
program and request an audit. Several of these producers with one-on-one consultations have successfully
passed audits.
During the one-on-one consultation, which may take 2 to 5 hours, the ACT representative, the Food Safety
Programs Coordinator, goes through each question of each section of the components the farm, grower,
or facility will audit for. Each answer is documented and at the end of the session, a report (below) will be
generated and sent to the facility, and also to ACT, the Citrus, Fruit & Vegetable Standardization Division,

23

Dr. Nolte, and the USDA Certified ADA Auditor. A follow up one-on-one may be required after correcting
deficiencies, prior to the actual audit, with another report being generated and distributed. This is done to
alert those involved of the corrections, accomplishments and levels of readiness for each component.
OPERATION/FARM:
DATE: __
CONTACT:_

__
________

CONTACT:

__

___

ACT REPRESENTATIVE:
They want certification in Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7.
This is a hydroponic operation, totally enclosed within a
warehouse.
Produce will include tomatoes, peppers, cucumbers, mushrooms,
microgreens.
GENERAL QUESTIONS
IMPLEMENTATION OF A FOOD SAFETY PROGRAM
P-1: in the beginning stages,
P-2:
TRACEABILITY
G-1: Yes, a program is beginning to be developed, not written
G-2: not yet
WORKER HEALTH AND HYGIENE
G-3: yes, City of
contract supplied
Once the grower or facility operator is confident they can pass the audit, they are able to contact the ADA
Auditor to visit their location and administer the audit. Each question of each section is weighted for points,
and a minimum score of 80% is required for certification. Questions not pertaining to the operation are
removed and scoring is adjusted accordingly. A score below 80% will not pass the audit and the ADA
Auditor will generate an Action Plan to inform the operator what would be required to pass. Once the
discrepancies are corrected a second audit will be scheduled. A score above 80% is passing and the
operator will be sent a certificate from USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service and the operation will be
entered into the AMS on-line database for prospective customers and suppliers.
ACT offers a Cost Share Program with funds from a Specialty Crop
Block grant from USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service. A successful
operator will submit an application, proof of payment of an audit and the
GHP/GAP certificate from USDA to the ACT office to help offset the cost
of the audit. Reimbursements will cover 75% of all costs associated with
one successful USDA GHP/GAP audit, up to a maximum of $750. To
date, several operators have taken advantage of this program. GHP/GAP
certifications expire and must be renewed annually.

24

Livestock & Crop Conservation Grant Program
The Livestock & Crop Conservation Grant Program (LCCGP) was created on September 18, 2003, by the
Arizona State Legislature to assist ranchers and farmers with the implementation of conservation projects
that ultimately provide for the preservation of open space. The Arizona Department of Agriculture is charged
with developing, implementing and managing the program. The LCCGP is funded through the Proposition
303 Growing Smarter Statute that was passed by public referendum in 1998. Approximately $1.8 million
was available in grant funds each year, through fiscal year 2011.
Per the grant program authorizing statute,
A.R.S. §41-511.23 (G) (1), eligible applicants
include individual landowners and grazing and
agricultural lessees of state or federal lands that
desire to implement conservation based
management alternatives using livestock or crop
production or reduction practices to provide
wildlife habitat or other public benefits that
preserve open space. Grant funds may be used
for projects taking place on private, State and
Federal land. The grant program has been run
on a biennial grant cycle.
During the two-year cycle, the LCCGP grant
manual, grant guidelines, and rating criteria are subject to a public comment period. The fifth grant cycle
was completed in fiscal year 2013. This grant cycle utilized unspent grant funds from all previous grant
cycles.
Discussions are ongoing with several state and federal agencies working together on a large scale
geographical conservation project that would utilize additional unspent grant funds from all previous grant
cycles. This project is scheduled to take place in late FY 2015.
During fiscal year 2014, the LCCGP Coordinators worked to monitor completed projects from the previous
grant cycles. The following types of projects were completed by grantees:





Utilization of funds as match/cost share to other conservation grants. For example, if the applicant is
participating in, or plans to apply for, a USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) grant which typically requires that the applicant
provide a percentage of the total project funding, LCCGP funds could be awarded for use as the required
cost share funds to the EQIP contract.
On-the-Ground Conservation Projects (for example: riparian fencing, water resource development,
grassland restoration).
Livestock deferment funding in relation to a conservation practice or project. For example, if the
applicant chooses to implement a conservation management practice such as prescribed burning or
herbicide application that requires the deferment of livestock, the applicant may apply for LCCGP funds
to cover the costs associated with deferring livestock.

25

The LCCGP Coordinators continue to
administer the existing grant contracts
from all previous grant cycles. Throughout
the duration of the grant project, the
LCCGP Coordinators provide administrative
support and information, answer questions
and concerns and assist the grantees with
reimbursement and funding advance
requests. At the close of FY14, 56 of the 56
grantees from the fiscal year 2005 cycle,
66 of the 70 grantees from the fiscal year
2007 cycle, 57 of the 63 grantees from the
fiscal year 2009 cycle, 33 of the 43
grantees from the fiscal year 2011 cycle and 12 of the 13 grantees from the fiscal year 2013 cycle had
completed their proposed grant projects. Additionally, throughout fiscal year 2014, more than $468,000
was disbursed to grantees to work on their contracted projects.
LCCGP Coordinators also continue to monitor projects funded by grant funds. Through on-site visits to see
what has been completed, they are able to ensure that the funding is being utilized properly and provide
additional technical services to grantees.

Specialty Crop Block Grant Program-Farm Bill
On December 21, 2004, the Specialty Crops
Competitiveness Act of 2004 authorized the USDA to
provide state assistance for specialty crops. Under Section
101 of the statute, the Secretary of Agriculture is directed
to “make grants to States for each of the fiscal years 2005
through 2009 to be used by State Departments of
Agriculture solely to enhance the competitiveness of
specialty crops.” The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act
of 2008 (Farm Bill) amended the Specialty Crops
Competitiveness Act of 2004. Under the amended Act,
the Secretary of Agriculture is directed to make grants to
States for each of the fiscal years 2008 through 2012 (referred to as the Specialty Crop Block Grant Program
– Farm Bill or SCBGP-FB) to be used by State Departments of Agriculture to enhance the competitiveness
of specialty crops. The Agricultural Act of 2014 continues funding for the program through 2018. The
Specialty Crops are defined as fruits, vegetables, tree nuts, dried fruits, and nursery crops (including
floriculture). The value of U.S. specialty crops is equivalent to the combined value of the five directly
subsidized program crops. However, sixty percent of all farmers do not raise program crops and do not
receive direct subsidies. The purpose of this act is to help address this inequity between program crops
and specialty crops.
The Arizona Department of Agriculture’s Specialty Crop Block Grant Program - Farm Bill is administered by
the ACT program. In fiscal year 2014, Arizona’s State Plan was approved by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture’s Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), and a cooperative agreement, which provided
$1,318,053.18 in grant funds to the ADA, was executed on September 24, 2014. The SCBGP-FB Program
Coordinators worked with sub-grantees to execute grant award agreements, and provide guidance and
assistance with quarterly reports and quarterly reimbursements.

26

On April 17, 2014, AMS announced the availability of $66 million in federal fiscal year 2014 funding. The
funding is authorized by the Agricultural Act of 2014 (Farm Bill). Each state department of agriculture is
eligible to receive a base grant of approximately $221,000.00. In addition, AMS allocated the remainder
of the grant funds based on the proportion of the value and acreage of specialty crop production in the
state. The 2014 base grant amount plus the AMS assigned value of specialty crop production for Arizona
is $1,100,428.11. The SCBGP-FB Program Manager submitted the Arizona State Plan to AMS on July 9,
2014.

Arizona Citrus Research Council
The Arizona Citrus Research Council was created by A.R.S. §3-468 to
support the development of citrus research programs and projects
within the Arizona citrus industry. The Council is funded by a per carton
(1.5 cents) assessment paid by Arizona Citrus producers. Last year, the
Arizona citrus industry produced more than 1.8 million cartons of
grapefruits, lemons, oranges and tangerines. Council programs and
projects target production, plant pest and disease control, efficient
fertilization and irrigation techniques and variety development. The
Council is comprised of five citrus producers appointed by the Governor:




Two producers from District One (including Yuma County)
One producer from District Two (Maricopa, Pima and Pinal Counties)
Two producers at large

Fiscal Year 2014 Financial Status - Arizona Citrus Research Council
Revenue
$28,175.28
Expenses
$23,335.60
Legislation passed in the 2012 legislative session created the Arizona Citrus Trust Fund which holds the
Council’s revenue in trust.

Arizona Iceberg Lettuce Research Council
The Arizona Iceberg Lettuce Research Council was created by A.R.S. §3-526 to
conduct research for an Arizona industry that produced approximately 23 million
cartons of iceberg lettuce in FY 2013. The Council is funded by a per carton (.004
cents) assessment paid by Arizona iceberg lettuce producers. Council members
are appointed by the Governor and consist of seven producers:



Four producers from District One (including Yuma and La Paz Counties)
Three producers at large

The Council reviews and awards a wide range of research proposals on topics such as variety development,
lettuce pest eradication, and for programs relating to food safety, production, harvesting, handling and
transporting lettuce from fields to markets. During fiscal year 2014, the Council continued to support
research projects by granting over $78,000 to the University of Arizona. Some examples of research grant
projects include evaluation of new insecticides, assessing irrigation water contamination risks and effective
management of powdery mildew.

27

Fiscal Year 2014 Financial Status-Arizona Iceberg Lettuce Research Council
Revenue
Expenses

$97,606.74
$88,172.25

Legislation passed in the 2012 legislative session created the Arizona Iceberg Lettuce Trust Fund which
holds the Council’s revenue in trust.

Arizona Grain Research and Promotion Council
The Arizona Grain Research and Promotion Council was created by A.R.S. §3-581 through §3-594 and
utilizes grower ‘check-off funds’ to aid in marketing wheat and barley, participate in research projects and
other programs that assist in reducing freshwater consumption, develop new grain varieties and to improve
grain production, harvesting and handling methods.
Research continues to be a top priority of the Council by continuing support for the research activities of
the University of Arizona. Research projects focus on sensor-based management of Nitrogen on irrigated
durum wheat in Arizona, reducing Cadmium accumulation in Durum wheat grown in Arizona, determination
of optimal planting configuration of low input and organic barley and wheat production. Annually, the
council funds the small grain variety test trials used by producers to evaluate the varieties available. More
than $48,000 was spent on research projects during fiscal year 2014.
The Council supports the activities of the U.S. Wheat Associates, the export market development arm of
the United States wheat industry. This support is important because more than half
of Arizona’s durum wheat is exported. The council collaborates with the California
Wheat Commission to conduct an annual crop quality survey of the Desert Durum®
crop in Arizona and Southern California and publishes the results for buyers around
the world.

Fiscal Year 2014 Financial Status - Arizona Grain Research and Promotion Council
Revenue
Expenses

$180,366.19
$118,420.24

Legislation passed in the 2012 legislative session created the Arizona Grain Research Trust Fund which
holds the Council’s revenue in trust.

Agricultural Employment Relations Board
The Agricultural Employment Relations Board (AERB) was created by
A.R.S. §23-1386 in 1993 to provide a means to bargain collectively
that is fair and equitable to agricultural employers, labor
organizations and employees, to provide orderly election procedures,
to resolve questions concerning representation of agricultural
employees and to declare that certain acts are unfair labor practices
that are prohibited and that are subject to control by the police
power of this state. The Board has an annual budget of $23,300.

28

The Board is comprised of seven members (and two alternates):




Two agricultural employers/management
Two organized agricultural labor representatives
Three public members, from which a Chairman must be selected.

29

State Agricultural Laboratory
The Arizona Department of Agriculture State Agricultural Laboratory provides quality agricultural
laboratory analysis, identification, certification, technical consultation and training services to
various regulatory divisions of the Department and others as provided by law. To maintain the
integrity of its test results, the Laboratory operates independently of the Department’s regulatory
divisions and operates under a stringent quality assurance program.
The Department laboratory exists in two separate, small laboratories. The table below illustrates
where testing is conducted.

Service
Entomology – M
Entomology – PCR
Plant Pathology – M
Plant Pathology - Elisa
Plant Pathology - PCR
Seed – Export
Seed – Regulatory
Brucellosis – Milk
Meat – Food Safety
Food Safety
Dairy Micro
Dairy Antibiotics
Dairy Pesticides
Dairy Aflatoxin
Feed
Fertilizer
Pesticide Formulations
Pesticide Residue

1520 W Adams

250 N 17th Ave

c (limited)
c
c
c
C
c
C

c

C (rtPCR methods)

c
c
C
C
C
c

C
C
C
C
c
c
c

C

Legend:
c = capability to perform testing under certain conditions with added/redirected
resources
C = capacity to perform testing with current resources

30

Pink Boll Worm Eradication
The SAL worked in conjunction with the Arizona Cotton Research and Protection Council (ACRPC)
and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) to develop a method of identifying
native pink boll worms. This insect is a significant pest affecting the production of cotton in arid
climates. In an effort to eradicate the pest, the USDA releases millions of sterile pink boll worm
moths into the environment in areas where cotton is grown. The sterile insects compete with
any remaining native insects during mating, effectively reducing the propagation of the species.
This program has been very successful and the damage caused by the pest has been largely
eliminated.
To monitor the success of the eradication, thousands of insect traps are placed and monitored in
cotton production areas throughout the US and Mexico. Before releasing the pink boll worm
moths, the USDA must “mark” them in order to delineate the sterile moths from any naturally
occurring moths. In the past, the pink boll worms were fed a chemical dye which aided in the
detection of the sterile moths. However, the longer the released moths were in the environment
prior to being trapped, the lower the concentration of the dye that remained in the moths for
detection. As the population of the native moths approaches zero, the difficulty in detecting a
very low level of dye in the sterile moths has become an impediment to determining whether the
eradication effort needs to continue.
SAL scientists developed a new method of determining if a trapped insect was a released sterile
moth or a native moth. Utilizing advanced instrumentation, SAL scientists could detect small
amounts of the element strontium when present in the body of the insects. USDA modified its
rearing procedures to incorporate strontium into the diet of the sterile pink boll worms. Now
moths obtained from the traps are tested by SAL scientists; moths containing significant amounts
of strontium can be readily identified as sterile moths while those lacking strontium can be
assumed to be native moths. The lab has processed nearly 2,000 samples for the ACRPC this
year.

Homeland Security
The SAL continues to maintain its capabilities to provide assistance to the State and the Nation in
the event of a homeland security emergency. Federal, State and local governments continue to
work together to produce a network of laboratories capable of responding to emergencies. SAL
has worked hard during the past year to secure its place within the laboratory emergency
response infrastructure.
Western Plant Diagnostic Network (WPDN) – Part of the National Plant Diagnostic Network
(NPDN), this network consists of laboratories performing plant pathogen, weed and insect pest
identifications. Within Arizona, as an offshoot of this network all identified laboratories with plant
pest detection capabilities have formed the Arizona Pest Diagnostic Network. The purpose of
these groups is to form and maintain a network of diagnostic labs that will communicate
information, mainly pest diagnoses and form a communication network to rapidly exchange
information in the event of a significant exotic pest find.
Food Emergency Response Network (FERN) – FERN is a network of state and federal laboratories
that are committed to analyzing food samples in the event of a biological, chemical, or
radiological outbreak or terrorist attack in this country. SAL is a member of the FERN for both
chemical and microbiological testing.

31

Quality Assurance Program
Quality assurance is an integral part of the Lab’s analytical operations. It is the scrupulous
attention to quality assurance standards that enables each of the laboratory’s customers to act
upon test results with utmost confidence.
Quality manuals define the laboratory policies, systems, programs, procedures and instructions to
assure the quality of the test results. Standard operating procedures referenced in the quality
manual detail laboratory processes, test methods, as well proper use and maintenance of
equipment. These procedures ensure uniformity of work and the accuracy and reproducibility of
test results.
The laboratory continues to monitor the increasing demand for ISO (International Organization
for Standardization) certification for laboratories providing regulatory testing. The evolving
standard for laboratories similar to SAL is ISO17025. As federal agencies complete the
implementation of ISO certification within their own labs, it is anticipated that the federal
agencies will require state laboratories to become similarly certified. Such certification is
expensive and time intensive; therefore, SAL will continue to monitor the situation and remain a
part of the conversations with regard to such certification requirements.

Laboratory Audits
The dairy microbiology lab undergoes on-site laboratory audits that are conducted every three
years by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Laboratory Evaluation Officers. Last year,
in accordance with procedures related to the relocation of the laboratory, SAL underwent a
special on-site audit; SAL passed the audit with flying colors. Such audits, combined with analyst
participation in an annual proficiency testing program ensure the quality of the analyses
conducted by the dairy microbiology laboratory.
This year marking the first laboratory audit by the United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA) of the laboratory’s meat pathogen testing program. This year’s audit is the next step in
forcing all state laboratories to become accredited to the ISO 17025 standard.

Reference Standards and Reference Materials
Certified reference material and internal quality control using secondary reference materials are
used regularly to ensure the accuracy of test results. The Arizona Department of Agriculture
Collection of Arthropods houses one of the largest and most comprehensive ant collections in
Arizona. It is part of an insect collection made up of over 20,000 individual specimens,
representing more than 250 families of insects. This important reference collection is used by
staff in identifying samples of beneficial and harmful insects, which are introduced or established
in the state.

Proficiency Test Programs (PTPs)
Analytical performance is validated by participation in several proficiency test programs. PTPs
provide unknown samples for analysis by the SAL and provide feedback as to how well the lab
did in detecting and/or enumerating test results. Examples include: feed sample PTP by the
American Association of Feed Control Officials; fertilizer sample PTP by McGruder’s Fertilizer
Check Sample Data Program; PTP for meat analyses by the USDA; dairy sample PTP by the
Laboratory Proficiency and Evaluation Team of the Food and Drug Administration; seed sample
PTP by the Association of Official Seed Analysts; pesticide product PTP by the American

32

Association of Pesticide Control Officials; pesticide residue PTP by the Environmental Protection
Agency and mycotoxin sample PTP by the American Oil Chemists Society. This year the
laboratory began participating in a new PTP for pathogenic organisms in meat products. This
was begun in response to increased QA requirements from the USDA for its cooperative
programs with the States.

Animal Disease Detection
The laboratory collected 288,110 blood samples and tested raw milk for the bacteria responsible
for causing brucellosis, a severe reproductive disease in cattle and other animals. In humans the
disease is known as undulant fever. Brucellosis may be transmitted from animals to humans
through non-pasteurized milk. Since the 1940s, the USDA has sought to eradicate brucellosis
from the U.S., resulting in the current Cooperative State Federal Brucellosis Eradication Program.
States are designated brucellosis free when none of their cattle or bison is found to be infected
for 12 consecutive months under an active surveillance program. Arizona has been brucellosisfree since 1987. The last area in the U.S. known to have an active presence of brucellosis is in
and around Yellowstone National Park. Monitoring is still conducted in Arizona due to the
presence of a very large slaughter facility in Tolleson where some of the cattle processed
originate from the Yellowstone area.

Food Safety
The laboratory participates in the Department’s Food Safety and Quality Assurance Program by
testing agricultural commodities for food-borne pathogens in the lab. Raw meat, ready-to-eat
products, and animal carcass swab samples are tested in support of the State’s Meat and Poultry
Inspection Program which is a cooperative program of the U. S. Department of Agriculture Food
Safety and Inspection Service program.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) certifies the dairy microbiology lab and individual
analysts to perform testing on dairy products, dairy product containers, and environmental dairy
water samples to allow export of Arizona’s milk and milk products to other states. Tests
conducted at SAL include bacteriological analyses, enzyme activity for proper pasteurization of
dairy products, antibiotic residues, and other indicators of milk safety and quality.

Forensic Testing
The SAL scientists test samples collected during investigations of off-target application of
agricultural chemicals, incorrect application of pesticides to homes for the prevention of termite
infestations or insect control, illegal discharge of pesticides into the environment, or failure to
take necessary actions to protect industry workers. These regulatory samples are collected by
investigators and delivered to the laboratory utilizing stringent chain of custody procedures.
Sample types received include water, soil, produce, foliage, animal tissues, air, clothing and
surface swabs. Complicating the analytical testing process are the over 11,000 pesticide
products registered for use in Arizona, any one of which could need to be detected as part of an
investigation. Analysis of these forensic samples requires advanced scientific tools and
experience.

33

Consumer Protection
The expertise of the Lab’s personnel with the chemistry of pesticides is further used to protect
Arizona’s consumers and industry through the provision of analysis of home-use, commercial and
agricultural pesticide products. The Department collects samples each year from the consumer
and industrial market place. Chemists then perform analyses to determine whether the content
and quality of the active ingredients are correctly displayed on the product label. This regulation
not only protects the end-user from potential financial losses, but it also plays a key role in
protecting pesticide applicators and farm workers against harmful exposure.
The laboratory also analyzes commercial feed and fertilizer products to determine whether the
amount of ingredients guaranteed on the label are accurate. This ensures that consumers
receive agricultural products that meet the label guaranteed quality. For example, a fertilizer may
have a grade guarantee of 10-20-5 which indicated the product must contain 10% nitrogen, 20%
phosphorous and 5% potassium and the lab would run tests for all three ingredients. Similarly, a
feed product may be guaranteed for protein, calcium, phosphorous or other nutrients requiring
multiple testing.
SAL analysts conduct testing of commercially available seed products for purity, germination rate,
and weed seed content to benefit Arizona’s farmers, landscapers, homeowners, golf courses and
seed export companies. Analyses were completed on seed samples to provide assurance that
the seed label matches its guaranteed performance when planted and does not contain excess
harmful weeds. SAL’s seed analysts are certified by the Association of Official Seed Analysts.

34

Environmental Services Division (ESD)
The Arizona Department of Agriculture Environmental Services Division is responsible for protecting public
health, agricultural workers, consumers and the environment. The Division is made up of three sections.
The Licensing Section provides licensing for much of the agency ensuring quality customer service and
appropriate cash handling. The Compliance Section protects the public, agricultural workers and pesticide
handlers employed in agribusiness through field inspections and complaint follow-up to monitor proper use
of crop protection products and ensuring compliance with environmental laws and rules. They also inspect
marketplaces and review labels, as well as take samples of feed, fertilizer, pesticide and seed for analysis
at the State Agricultural Laboratory to ensure consumers are purchasing what is represented on the labels.
The Office of Special Investigation is the criminal investigative section for the agency relating to department
statutory authorities.

Staff Allocations
The Environmental Services Division had 19.5 full-time employee positions as of June 30, 2014 which was
no change from 2013. Nine of these positions are in the field and are responsible for sampling various
nonfood products, ensuring compliance with pesticide, feed, fertilizer, seed and worker protection statutes
and rules, and conducting criminal investigations.

Information Technology
The IT Section completed 2 major projects this past year. First, the Pesticide Registration database was
re-written to accept online renewal of registrations. This was successful in that there were no issues in
payment or records processing, and of the 12,656 registered pesticide products, 2,354 (18.5%) were
registered online from 290 different companies, generating a revenue total of $277,700, or 21.5% of
total Pesticide revenue. The other program that was addressed is the Credentials program, which tracks
license holders that are in some way related to pesticide application, whether that be a grower, seller,
pilot, or applicator. In the coming renewal season this fall, we anticipate online renewals for Credentials
to be at least as successful as the Pesticide Registration was this past season.
The Agency web site has been migrated to the Drupal platform in compliance with ADOA directives, to
conform to statewide standards and the domain name has also been updated to agriculture.az.gov, also
to comply with standards. The migration was a success, and the new site design has been very well
received by the public. Certain functions of the site remain in-house due to the database-intensive
queries that retrieve license holder information, which cannot be migrated for privacy and data security
concerns.
Work is in progress for a new application in support of the Dairy program in the Animal Services Division
that will allow compliance with USDA in reporting and documentation of Dairy products processing
facilities and dairy farms. This project is near completion, and will provide detailed reporting for the
various facilities and farms for everything from inspection documentation to lab sample test results.
During the past year, the IT Department responded to 369 reported user issues, solving 99.2% those
within 4 hours. There were no unscheduled major outages to network services.
The Agency mail server delivered over 950,000 separate mail items successfully, both inbound and
outbound, and blocked more than 235,000 messages containing malware or virus infections.

35

Lastly, the Agency maintained a 99.68% uptime reliability for all server based systems for the past year.
This is attributed to the continued updating of server hardware, and ongoing funding for this is essential
in order to provide reliable electronic communications to both Agency employees and the citizens of
Arizona.

Licensing
The centralized Licensing Section processes approximately 96 percent of licenses issued by the department.
Office hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. After 4:30 p.m., paperwork is accepted but the issuance of
the corresponding license may not occur until the following day. The best way to get needed forms for
licensure application is to access our home page at https://agriculture.az.gov/forms-library.
The Department of Agriculture is committed to providing excellent customer service on a timely basis. This
continues to be proven out by the many customer service survey cards returned stating what a pleasant
experience it was and how great the employees were.

Industry Fees Protect Consumers
The Non-Food Quality assurance program is funded with no general funds. The funding comes from monies
collected from: an annual $10 commercial feed license and the $0.20 per ton commercial feed inspection
fee; an annual $125 fertilizer license, a $50 per brand and grade specialty fertilizer (fertilizer for nonfarm
use, including home gardens, lawns, golf courses, parks and cemeteries) registration and a $0.25 per ton
fertilizer inspection fee; a $100 per product pesticide registration; and, an annual seed license fee of $50
for dealers and $100 for labelers. Approximately one-half of the money collected for seed licensing is used
for half a position at the State Agricultural Laboratory to perform seed quality analysis.
One hundred dollars of the fee paid for each fertilizer license and $75 of the pesticide registration fee help
support the Arizona Water Quality Assurance Revolving Fund (WQARF), which is administered by the Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ), to be used for ground water cleanup projects. In 2014,
$967,476 in fees was collected for the WQARF: $60,735 in fertilizer fees and $906,741 in pesticide
registration fees.

Licensing Requires Continuing Education
The department’s continuing education efforts keep users of restricted use pesticides aware of current
laws, rules and the latest in agriculture pest management to help protect the environment through efficient
utilization of pesticides.
Individuals holding commercial certification are required to earn six continuing education units each year.
Those holding private certification are required to earn three units each year. Private certification enables
individuals to apply restricted use pesticides on land owned or rented by their employer or themselves.
Commercial certification allows application on any agricultural property. Individuals holding pest control
advisor licenses, provide written pest control recommendations, are required to earn fifteen continuing
education credit hours annually.
CONTINUING EDUCATION APPLICATIONS

ADA APPLICATIONS RECEIVED FY 2014

TOTAL
APPROVED

DENIED

416

401

15

36

During FY 2014 many training sessions were held that provided credential holders the opportunity to earn
credits. Total credit hours granted to educational programs for continuing education totaled 839.5 hours.

Testing Center
Tests administered by the Environmental Services Division include milk haulers, cotton seed samplers, and
a myriad of pesticide-use licenses. Tests are administered in Phoenix, Monday through Friday at our office,
1688 West Adams Street. To schedule a testing appointment applicants call (602) 542-3578. For people
outside the Phoenix-metro area, appointments must be made by calling 928-344-7909 (Yuma) or 520-7703035 or 520-770-3036 (Tucson).

Exams Administered in FY 2014
TYPE OF EXAM

Total
Exams

Number
Passed

Number
Failed

Passing
Rate

1

1

0

100%

213

182

31

85%

1

1

0

100%

36
145
12
89
0
497

22
103
3
67
0
379

14
42
9
22
0
118

61%
71%
25%
75%
N/A
76.2%

Aerial Applicator (AAP)
Commercial Applicator (PUC)
Custom Applicator (CAA)
Pest Control Advisor (PCA)
Private Applicator (PUP)
Fumigant Endorsement
Milk Sampler & Hauler
Cottonseed Sampler
TOTALS

The following chart represents the total number of licenses, permits and certificates issued by the
Licensing Section during FY 2014:
Licenses and Registrations Issued in FY 2014
Pesticide - Total Pesticides Registered

12638

Agriculture Use Pesticides

1379

Non-Agricultural Use Pesticides

10356

Fertilizer - Licensed Fertilizer Companies

409

Specialty Fertilizers

3,184

Feed - Licensed Feed Companies

627

Seed Dealers

1,241

Seed Labelers

173

Dairy/Milk Industry Licenses

364

Aquaculture Licenses

66

Egg & Egg Products

119

Meat Industry Licenses

235

Livestock Brand Certificates

1,696

Equine Certificates Issued

69

Equine Rescue Facilities Registered

20

37

Certificates of Free Sale

203

Products Certified for Free Sale

2,943

Native Plant Permits Issued

1,045

Number of Native Plants Permitted

55,758

WPS-Worker Cards Issued

16,126

WPS-Handler Cards Issued

6,622

WPS-Trainers Certified

168

The end of the calendar year is very busy in licensing. The following chart represents the total number of
pesticide use related licenses issued during the 2014 fiscal year all which expire at year’s end. Other
licenses that expire on December 31 are aquaculture, meat, dairy and pesticides. Additionally, feed and
fertilizer tonnage reports for the fourth quarter are due at year’s end.

Pesticide Use Related Credential Summary FY 2014
Grower Permits (PGP)

1306

Pesticide Sellers (PSP)

137

Ag Aircraft Pilots (AAP)

43

Custom Applicators (CAA)

49

Equipment Tags

192

Pest Control Advisors (PCA)

209

Private Applicators (PUP)

468

Commercial Applicators (PUC)

370

Golf Course Applicators (PUG)

366

Pesticide Responsible Individual (PRI)

20

Fertilizer Tonnage FY 2014 (in Tons)
Dry
53,950.82

Bulk
98,380.18

Liquid
161,885.96

Total
314,216.96

Feed Tonnage FY 2014 (in Tons)
Total 1,375, 507

Compliance
Pesticide Compliance and Worker Safety Program
These field staff conducts a number of different types of health and safety inspections at commercial and
private businesses that apply pesticides in agricultural settings. This includes pesticide dealers and pesticide
production establishments to ensure compliance with state and federal pesticide sales, manufacturing and
bulk storage regulations. Inspections dealing with the new federal pesticide containment regulations which
deal with bulk agricultural pesticide storage and pesticide container requirements became even more
detailed as the container regulations went into effect. These regulations are to ensure containers do not
fail and in the unlikely event that a large container does fail, there is containment to ensure mass

38

environmental contamination does not occur. These inspectors also are responsible for the Non-Food
Quality Assurance program inspections.

Misuse is taken seriously
The Department observes pesticide applications, mixing and loading pesticides, storage and disposal of
pesticides and empty pesticide container disposal to ensure safe pesticide use. Complaints alleging pesticide
misuses are promptly and thoroughly investigated. Once a complaint investigation is complete, a
recommended disposition is prepared. No recommended disposition dealing with a third party complaint
can take place without a review and approval by the Associate Director, the Director and by law an attorney
from the Office of the Arizona Attorney General. In cases where facts document a violation occurred and
all reviewing parties agree a violation of the pesticide laws occurred, a citation can be issued. Cited parties
may request a hearing with the Office of Administrative Hearings or pay a penalty established by law for
their actions.

Report pesticide misuse
The ESD has a long standing Pesticide Emergency Hotline at 1-800-423-8876 where potential pesticide
misuse can be reported. Arizona requires that this number be part of the required worker safety training
elements so workers and handlers have the knowledge to make it easier to report worker protection
standard (WPS) violations. This line is used by pesticide applicators to request an inspector to monitor an
application when spraying in sensitive areas where concerns have been previously raised regarding
applications.

Restricted Use Pesticides
Anything that makes a claim to control, mitigate, repel, kill etc. a pest is a considered a pesticide in Arizona.
Inspections are conducted at pesticide marketplaces to ensure that pesticides are registered with the state
and the Environmental Protection Agency. Pesticides that have been manufactured in other countries and
illegally imported into Arizona may pose health risks to people, animals, and the environment as they are
not subject to the same safety standards, strict quality control, labeling or child-safe packaging measures
as pesticides manufactured in or for use in the United States. Inspections at pesticide dealers and on
agricultural establishments ensure that pesticides classified as restricted use are sold and used only by
persons who have proven their competency for certification through testing to show they understand labels
and can manage the associated risks. This also ensures that agricultural insecticides do not find their way
into urban settings for residential use, which can be deadly. This is an ongoing concern due to the increased
pressures from bedbugs.

Agricultural Worker Safety
Farms, forests, nurseries, and greenhouses applying and using agricultural use pesticides must comply with
Arizona's Worker Protection Standard (WPS). The worker safety program and regulations are designed to
protect agricultural workers and pesticide handlers.
If agricultural-use pesticides are applied on an agricultural establishment the establishment must train
workers and handlers of agriculture pesticides, provide notification of pesticide applications, provide
required personal protective equipment and decontamination supplies, take the employee to the doctor if
they claim illness due to pesticides and provide a central location where information on pesticides used on
the establishment can be obtained. The law prohibits an agricultural employer from retaliating against an
employee for complying with or attempting to comply with agricultural safety standards.

39

Train The Trainer [TTT] Workshops
During the state financial year, ESD Compliance staff conducted four Pesticide Safety Train-The-Trainer
Workshops in English and Spanish for new trainers and those with expired certificates. The full-day
workshops were held in Phoenix, Yuma, and Pipe Spring. In addition to these workshops, ESD
Compliance Industrial Hygienists also presented five, 4-hour refresher courses for current pesticide safety
trainers in Phoenix, and Yuma.

Recertification & Training Courses
Annual Recertification & Training Courses were held across the state. Pest Control Advisors, Certified
Applicators and Responsible Parties for Pesticide Sellers were able to obtain six hours Continuing
Education Units for attending the full day course on any of the following dates: November 14, Yuma,
November 19, Safford or November 21, Maricopa. Courses covered pollinator protection, private
applicator fumigation use and numerous other topics.

Groundwater Protection
Close cooperation between the Arizona Department of Agriculture and the Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality continued. Over 1600 analyses were performed on samples from 16 different
monitoring wells for the active ingredients on the state’s groundwater protection list and pesticides of
interest list for the EPA. The state ag laboratory does the analysis. The funding for the analysis has been
provided by the US EPA through the agencies cooperative agreement. Working as a team with ADEQ all
new agricultural use products are being reviewed before registration to ensure the state’s groundwater
resources are protected.

Community / Industry Outreach Activities
ESD Compliance inspection staff participated in community / industry outreach activities in Yuma, San
Luis and Willcox Arizona.





Dia Del Campesino Health and Information Fair – San Luis, AZ
Willcox Ag Days – Willcox, AZ
2013 Annual Irrigation Workers Safety Meeting – Yuma, AZ
Rain for Rent Worker Safety Training – Yuma, AZ

Training /Conference Attendance
ESD Compliance staff attended training/conferences as follows:







Pesticide Program Management for New Supervisors / Managers – Sacramento, CA
NCIT CLEAR Specialized Investigator Training – St. Louis, MO
2014 Desert Ag Conference – Chandler, AZ
AAPFCO 26th Fertilizer Administrators’ Seminar – Boise, ID
STAA Annual Convention – Tubac, AZ
New Technologies for Arizona Field Crops, Maricopa, AZ

40

Worker Protection & Safety (WPS)
Origin of Investigation Cases

9%
Routine Inspections
[20]

Follow‐Up 3rd Party [2]

91%

Pesticide Control (USE)
Origin of Investigation Cases

Follow‐up 3rd Party
Complaints [4]

11%

Routine
Inspections [2]

45%

22%

Form 1080 Review [2]
Other Agency Referral
[1]

22%

41

Worker Protection &
Safety
Final Case Actions

21

8
2
Citations with penalty
issued

Warnings Issued ‐
NO penalty

Administrative Actions

Pesticide Compliance
(USE)
Final Case Actions

11
8

2

Citations with penalty
issued

Warnings Issued ‐
NO penalty

42

Administrative Actions

Worker Protection & Safety
Case Penalties

$4,673

$2,872
Penalties
Assessed

$7,545

Penalties
Paid

Penalties
Outstanding

Pesticide Compliance (USE)
Case Penalties

$2,086

Penalties
Assessed

$325

Penalties
Paid

Penalties
Outstanding

43

$2,411

Pesticide USE & Worker Safety
Violations Observed
Pesticide Control (USE) Violations
Label Violation
Drift / Overspray
Expired License
Illegal Sales
Record Keeping
Failure to Train
Container Disposal / Storage
Medical Emergency Information Not Posted / Missing /
Incomplete
Operating without a valid license
Unregistered Pesticide
Application List Not Provided / Posted / Incomplete
Central Posting – Missing / Incomplete / Inaccessible
Personal Safety Equipment Not Provided
Violation of Restricted Entry Interval
Failure to Verify Training
Safety Poster Not Posted / Illegible / Inaccessible
Decontamination Site / Supplies Not Provided

Worker Safety Violations
Failure to Train
Failure to Verify Training
Central Posting – Missing / Incomplete - Inaccessible
Application List Not Provided / Posted / Incomplete
Medical Emergency Information not Posted / Missing /
Incomplete
No Warning Signs Posted / Signs Not Removed
Violation of Restricted Entry Interval
Decontamination Site / Supplies Not Provided
Safety Poster not Posted / Illegible / Inaccessible
TRAINER – Expired Certification or No Certification
Label Violation – Storage / Disposal / Transport / General
Misuse
Unsafe Environment
Container Disposal / Storage
Record Keeping

44

Number of
Violations

8
5
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

Number of
Violations

18
11
11
8
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

Non-Food Quality Assurance
Marketplace Inspections and Sampling

Pesticide control inspectors inspect and
sample animal feed products, fertilizer,
pesticide and seed in the marketplace to
protect consumers by ensuring that
products meet label guarantees. “Cease and
Desist” orders are issued on unregistered
products and unlicensed companies when
they fail to come into compliance or if
products do not pass laboratory analysis or
have other issues relating to the products
being mislabeled.

Sample Analysis for 2013 / 2014 SFY
Sample
Type
Feed
Fertilizer
Water
Pesticide
Formulation
Pesticide
Residue
Seed

Collected Analyzed
96

200

85

199

0

51

81

81

78

325

100

469

Samples can have numerous analyses.

Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy Inspections (Mad Cow Disease)
The division, working under a cooperative agreement with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA),
conducted 35 inspections of feed manufacturers, dairies, feed yards, trucking companies and dealers to
ensure compliance with federal regulations regarding animal feed ingredients fed to ruminants and their
potential for human health and safety concerns.

45

Non-Food Quality Enforcement Actions

FERTILIZER
TOTAL NUMBER OF CASES OPENED
Routine Inspections
Follow-Up 3rd Party
NUMBER OF FERTILIZER PENALTIES ISSUED
Total amount of penalties issued
Total amount of outstanding penalties
CEASE & DESIST ORDERS ISSUED
Unregistered Specialty Fertilizer
Quality Assurance Analysis Failures
Unlicensed Commercial Fertilizer Company
WARNINGS ISSUED
Unregistered Specialty Fertilizer
Quality Assurance Analysis Failures
Unlicensed Commercial Fertilizer Company

COMMERCIAL FEED
TOTAL NUMBER OF CASES OPENED
Routine Inspections
CEASE & DESIST ORDERS ISSUED
Unlicensed Commercial Feed Company
Quality Assurance analysis Failures
Misbranding – not labeled as required
WARNINGS ISSUED
Unlicensed Commercial Feed Company
Quality Assurance Analysis Failures
Misbranding – not labeled as required

46

Number
8
7
1
2
$402.45
$402.45
9
5
3
1
8
4
3
1

Number
23
23
30
23
6
1
27
23
3
1

Non-Food Quality Enforcement Actions
Number

SEED
TOTAL NUMBER OF CASES OPENED
Routine Inspections
Follow-Up 3rd Party
CEASE & DESIST ORDERS ISSUED
Expired Test Date
Unlicensed Seed Dealer
WARNINGS ISSUED
Unlicensed Seed Labeler
Expired Test Date

4
3
1
3
2
1
2
1
1

Number

PESTICIDE

Definitions:

TOTAL NUMBER OF CASES OPENED
Routine Inspections
Follow-up third-party complaints
Division Generated
Form 1080 Review
CEASE & DESIST ORDERS ISSUED
State Unregistered Pesticides
Misbranding – False Misleading Labeling
WARNINGS ISSUED
State Unregistered Pesticides
Misbranding

15
7
5
2
1
7
5
2
6
5
1

Warning/Notice of Violation (NOV) - Warns a manufacturer or distributer of violations related to Feed, Fertilizer, Pesticide, and Seed
products offered for sale or distribution in Arizona. Multiple warnings may result in products being removed from sale or distribution,
as well as injunctions or seizure of violative products.
Cease and Desist (C&D) - A Cease and Desist is issued when a company fails to come into compliance and requires that the product
is removed from sale and distribution in Arizona. C&D Orders remove substandard products from the marketplace for consumer
protection.

Total Non-Food Quality Enforcement Actions – Fertilizer, Commercial Feed,
Seed and Pesticide:
Cease & Desist Orders Issued:

49

Warnings / Notice of Violations Issued:

43

Country of Origin Labeling (COOL)
For the fifth year, the division worked under a federal cooperative agreement with USDA Agricultural
Marketing Service and hired a part-time inspector to conduct inspections under the program. Inspections

47

are conducted at assigned marketplaces, mainly grocery stores, across Arizona checking for compliance
with the federal Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) requirements. The COOL regulations apply to fresh and
frozen fruits and vegetables, fish and shellfish, beef, veal, pork, goat, and lamb/mutton, chicken, ginseng,
and finally peanuts, pecans and macadamia nuts. Products must bear labeling indicating the country of
origin for the commodity as defined by the law. Fish and shellfish are also required to be labeled as to
whether or not they are wild or farm-raised. The changes to the COOL regulations this year were that for
muscle cuts of meat it must include where the meat was born, raised and processed. However, concerns
still exist for labeling the muscle cuts with international trading partners.

Office of Special Investigations
The Office of Special Investigations’ (OSI) primary responsibility is performing detailed investigations
involving criminal and civil violations of the Arizona Native Plant Act and the Arizona Livestock Laws and
providing support to the other divisions and programs within the department. The office is comprised of a
supervisor and one investigator who have gone through extensive training to investigate criminal and civil
misconduct involving native plant theft and destruction; theft, killing and cruelty of livestock; illegal
slaughter and processing of food animals; archeological site destruction and theft of cultural resources.
OSI responds to many calls, e-mails, letters and visitors regarding Native Plants and Livestock issues. This
communication contains a diverse array of people from the public, private, government and law
enforcement sectors. The communication is not always a complaint. The bulk of the calls, e-mails, letters
or walk-ins is for information and/or assistance. OSI responded to 5,675 telephone calls, e-mails, letters
and visitors in the Phoenix and Tucson offices: 1,636 dealt with native plant issues, 1,567 were livestock
related, 2 antiquities inquiries and 2,470 communications related to other issues, i.e. training, public
relations, agency assists both inner-office and external.

Office of Special Investigations
Communications
FY 2013 / 2014

2470

1636

1567

0

48

2

Officer Certification, Training & Meetings
Both OSI employees are certified peace officers and as such participate in annual training both to meet
officer certification requirements, to enhance investigation techniques and keep up with today’s trends in
the law enforcement arena. The OSI Supervisor is the Arizona Peace Officers Standards and Training Board
(AZPOST) Training Coordinator for the Department and is responsible for managing the Department’s law
enforcement certification, scheduling training and maintaining the records of training for all department
peace officers.
All full time peace officers with the department are required to complete the minimum requirements prior
to the end of the calendar year except those employees who were in a certified academy during the
calendar year, their certification requirements begin in January of the year following their graduation. Due
to numerous scheduling conflicts, sick leave and staff reassignments there were several officers that did
not get their required training completed within the calendar year but were able to complete it within 90
days of the close of the calendar year which brought all officers into compliance. Allowances are made for
just these types of circumstances.
AZPOST no longer reviews the files within the agency but instead the agency training coordinator is required
to supply AZPOST compliance division with confirmation of training for those officers requested by AZPOST
on a form provided by AZPOST. After the AZPOST compliance staff review the forms a letter is sent to the
training coordinator confirming that ADA officers are in compliance.
The minimum standards for a peace officer of the State of Arizona is 8 hours of continuing education per
year, 8 hours of proficiency training every three years, a minimum score of 210 out of 250 in an AZPOST
approved daytime firearms qualification shoot and a passing score in an AZPOST approved Judgmental
shoot utilizing a minimum of three discriminatory scenarios. The chart below reflects the actual continuing
education hours for the year for each officer along with the dates of qualifications in proficiency and firearms
and a check to insure there is compliance.

CERTIFIED OFFICER TRAINING STATUS ~ CY 2013
Arizona Department of Agriculture
Updated: 3/25/2014 – Austin – OSI – ADA - AZPOST Training Coordinator
Officers

* denotes
specialty
officer
K. Austin
T. Chacon
R. Christensen
D. Drake
D. Hale
J. Pepper
R. Porter
*M. Reimer

Total
Continuing
Education
Hours

Proficiency
Training
Performed

AZPOST
requirement
: 8 hours
annually

AZPOST
reqiuirement:
8 hours every
three years /
due in 2014

15
14
11
16
33
80
8.5
23

Passed 2010
Passed 2010
Passed 2010
Passed 2010
Passed 2010
New hire
Passed 2010
Passed 2010

Firearms
Qualification
Performed

49

Minimum:
AZPOST
approved
daytime qual.
Course:
annually
11/7/2013
11/7/2013
11/7/2013
12/18/2013
11/7/2013
9/18/2013
11/7/2013
11/7/2013

Judgmental
Qualification
Performed

compliance

AZPOST
Minimum:
three
discriminatory
scenarios

AZPOST
minimum
standards
completed

1/7/2014
3/25/2014
11/7/2013
1/7/2014
11/7/2013
11/20/2013
1/2/2014
1/23/2014










T. Schultz
J. Servis

19
28

Passed 2010
Passed 2010

2/12/2014
11/7/2013

2/12/2014
11/7/2013




Officer Certification Records for 2013 were sent to AZPOST on: 03/25/2014 and were found to be in compliance.

In calendar 2013 9 out of the 10 officers with the agency completed rifle qualification and 7 out 10
completed shotgun qualification. Rifle and shotgun qualification is not required by AZPOST for officer
certification. If the agency approves the carry of such firearms officers must pass a qualification course
approved by AZPOST.
OSI’s Investigations Supervisor is Arizona’s State Director for the Western States
Livestock Investigators Association (WSLIA). The Association holds an annual
training seminar and Board meeting in Reno, Nevada in March of each year. Most
of WSLIA members are certified peace officers and come from fifteen western
States and Canada.
The training is designed to give continuing education credit hours for the certified
officers and is most often specific to rural crime and enhanced training for the
rural crime officer with an emphasis on livestock crime.
This year WSLIA was approved for 12 hours of AZPOST credit. ASD sent one sergeant and two officers to
the conference and the expenses were covered by the $2198.00 received from AZPOST to help pay travel
expenses

Banquet at the conclusion of the conference, Sgt. Raymon Christensen, Officer Randy Porter and Officer JD Pepper from ADA-ASD in
the foreground.

The continuing training given at the conference was a 4 hour session on how to read body language by
world renown Lou Tessman; 2 hours of training on search and seizure by Idaho Superior Court Judge Tom
Watkins and former Idaho Owyhee County Prosecutor and now defense Attorney Scott James; 1 hour of
training on commercial vehicle stops presented by Captain Reese of the Idaho State Police; a 3 hour session
on investigative tools and internet in oil field theft that can be used for any type of theft presented by Gary

50

Henderson of Devon Energy and lastly a 2 hour session on case preparation presented by our agency’s
Special Investigations Supervisor, Kevin ‘Zeke’ Austin.
In July OSI’s Supervisor attended the 67th Annual meeting of the International Livestock Identification
Association (ILIA) in Lake Tahoe, Nevada. Arizona is a charter founder of this organization and has
maintained continuous membership. The group was originally organized as the International Brands
Committee and Arizona has had several past presidents. The emphasis of the organization is animal
identification and inspection.
The department
continues to have a voice in animal identification with
this organization by continuing to support attendance
and the program.
The ILIA is a strong supporter of brands as a legitimate
form of identification and encourages legislation that
provides for laws regarding inspection of livestock for
ownership. An important program within the
Environmental Services Division is the livestock brand
program which is an integral part of livestock
identification in Arizona, and throughout the western
United States and Canada.
That said, the mandatory individual animal identification in Canada and now the ADT (Animal Disease
Traceability) program in the United States has prompted animal industry supporters in the technology field
to design and develop numerous RFID (radio frequency identification) devices, primarily ear tags, that can
be read using several different devices that scan or ‘pick up’ RFID tag placed in an animal’s ear.
The ILIA conference begins with a State and Province report that includes individual statistical data on
numbers of the different livestock inspected in each State and Province, fees collected, and animal
traceability updates for each. Arizona continues to be the least expensive for the individuals seeking the
inspections to be performed.
The livestock industry is a critical industry in North America and generates an enormous impact both in job
creation and revenue generation. The North American livestock industry is also critical in supplying safe
food to over 475,000,000 people in the United States, Canada and Mexico.
The dues paid to this organization help provide funds
to continue a 22 state 4 province network that we can
reach out to electronically on livestock theft alerts. (All
Points Bulletin) With the current pace that a theft ring
can move livestock it is important to be able to get the
information out on missing livestock so that the
member organizations can get it out to their inspection
and investigation personnel quickly.
This information is delivered by a member agency to
the Colorado Brand Board which then distributes it out
electronically to all members.

Young feeder cattle in a feedlot in Texas.

51

The ILIA conference has always provided a wide array of speakers that range from agriculture statisticians
and forward thinking agri-business reps to investigators with up to the minute information on animal rights
activists and environmental activists.
This year there was an exceptional presentation by Emily Meredith, the Director of Comunications with the
Animal Agriculture Alliance. The Animal Agriculture Alliance has been engaged in monitoring the animal
rights movement for 26 years! The Alliance works to engage proactively in the same space that the groups
use to detract us from the real truth and works dilligently to correct misinformation about livestock
production and build meaningful relationships with agriculture’s true stakeholders, the consumers.
There was an informational session presented by representatives from the Hartford Insurance Livestock
Department regarding insurance claims side of livestock transportation accidents and they provided many
answers to questions from the audience.
Similar to what ILIA had last year, there was a panel discussion on the ADT (Animal Disease Traceability)
rule and animal health discussion. This year State Veterinarians were invited to sit in on the discussion
along with the industry representatives and APHIS representatives.

Enforcement Activity
There were 43 cases of alleged criminal/civil violations opened involving native plants, of which 36 are
alleged criminal violations. There were 27 native plant cases that resulted in successful compliance. The
number of criminal referrals was up 19 percent and the number of civil referrals was up 38 percent from
last year.
There are several native plant and livestock cases still under investigation pending follow up interviews,
location of evidence, other agency findings and evidence analysis by the State Crime Laboratory. OSI
continues to work closely with the BLM, Arizona Game and Fish, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Land
Department and County Sheriff’s offices on several native plant cases.
This past fiscal year there were no livestock investigation referrals from the Animal Services Division. There
were 15 requests for an APB (All Points Bulletin) which is for lost, strayed or stolen livestock. The chart
below shows the categories of livestock and their respective numbers. Of the 173 reported only 5 animals
were recovered: 1 bull, 1 heifer and 3 horses.

ALL POINTS BULLETINS (APB) FY 2013/2014
Reported lost, strayed or stolen Livestock
Horses
Gelding/stud Mare
3

1

cow

Bull

Cattle
Steer

92

5

1

52

Heifer

Calf

5

62

Other
goat sheep
4

0

Total
173

In the Native plant arena there was one case spotlighted in FY
2013/2014 involving the City of Scottsdale’s failure to file an
Intent to Clear Land which resulted in the City paying a
$3000.00 civil penalty.
The State of Arizona Native Plant Program takes the destruction
of protected native plants serious as do the constituents and as
a result of some observant Scottsdale residents OSI was able
to perform an investigation which led to the payment of the fine
by the City of Scottsdale.

Native Plants Investigations
The Arizona Native Plant Law was established to protect native plants in their original growing sites. The
law requires a person or business to submit an application for a permit and tag to remove and/or transport
any protected native plant taken from its original growing site. The application undergoes review by the
department to guarantee the land where the plants will be removed from is owned by the person or
business entity stated thereon.
It is illegal in Arizona to destroy or dig up any
protected native plant without the consent of the
landowner. To regulate the collection of protected
native plants, the department enforces the law
through investigations, legal action against
violators, public awareness through the media, and
permit issuance.
We continually work closely with other agencies due
to the fact that we have limited personnel to
continually be out in the field. The photograph at
right was provided to OSI by a USDA forest service
employee that believed this could be illegal.
This is an illegal taking of a protected native plant that resulted in
a guilty plea by the person responsible.

There were twenty-one cases of native plant theft opened in FY 2013/0214 of which two were closed as
unfounded. Fifteen were completed and the cases closed due to the factual evidence that demonstrated
the persons accused were in compliance with the law. There are currently three open cases which are
being investigated.
An unfortunate trend OSI is seeing in native plant investigations is an increasing number of native plant
destruction by both state agencies and private property owners failing to file the required notice of intent
to clear land of protected native plants prior to construction. Three of ten cases were state agencies, one
was closed as unfounded, one has been concluded and we are awaiting a reply from the agency and the
last is still under investigation.

53

The other seven were private property owners. Three were closed as unfounded; one citation issued and
a fine paid, the other three warnings were issued. OSI also opened five cases of misuse of permits and
tags. Four cases were closed as unfounded, one is still under investigation.
Lastly, the OSI office in Tucson responded to numerous requests for reviews of pending large construction
projects by state, federal and municipal agencies such as the Arizona State Land Department, Military bases
and the Arizona Department of Transportation. The office responded in writing to 181 such request in FY
2013/2014 which is slightly down from last year.

OSI Administrative Statistics
NATIVE PLANT PERMITS AND TAGS

FY '14-QUARTERLY REPORT-TUCSON OFFICE
Month
Issued

No. of
Permits

Saguaro
Tags

Regular
Tags

Green
Seals

August

25

90

107

1,390

$

1,376.50

September

37

419

747

520

$

6,857.00

October

34

163

204

1,845

$

2,402.25

November

19

23

1012

1,102

$

3,174.30

December

23

176

355

780

$

2,182.00

January

33

283

298

100

$

3,073.00

February

37

251

1686

1550

$

4,233.00

March

45

672

1,099

1615

$

10,062.25

April

32

218

322

2671

$

2,954.65

May

30

428

302

2860

$

4,913.00

June

16

218

143

1485

$

2,258.25

TOTAL

331

2,941

6,275

15,918

$

43,486.20

TOTAL

Number of permits, tags and seals issued and revenue received from the Tucson office for FY 2013/2014

During the fiscal year, a portion of the Tucson OSI investigator’s duties include the issuance of native plant
transportation and removal permits. The schedule is four hours Monday’s and Friday’s only. The
Investigator performs other duties while in the office such as report writing, interviews and administrative
reporting.
As a result of the administrative duties of the OSI investigator in Tucson the OSI supervisor tracks the
permits and tags issued along with the revenue collected. Below is a breakdown of the permits and tags
issued and the revenue collected for the fiscal year.

54

The trend is relatively steady for the past two years in permit and tag sales with some improvement over
the last five years. The growth in sales is slow reflecting the slow but steady gain in the economy.
One final note on OSI. There are only two Office of Special
Investigations officers, but without their efforts and presence in
and out of the State the protected native plants that everyone
around the world enjoys seeing would be limited in number and
dwindling rapidly without a strong program. OSI takes native plant
theft and destruction very serious and strives daily to keep them
from being stolen and/or damaged or destroyed illegally. There is
nothing more majestic on any place on this planet that a saguaro
cactus.

55

Office of Pest Management
Staff Allocations
The OPM has allocated 30 full-time employee positions with 17 of them being filled as of June 30, 2014.
Six of these positions are in the field and are responsible for all the inspections and complaint follow-up.

Licensing
Did not
License or

Received/

Registration

Processed

Newly Issued

Overall
Issued

follow
through by
end of

No. of Licensees
end of FY2014

FY2014
Certified
Applicator
Qualified
Applicator
Business
Branch Office

8052

919

8040

12

6251

1868

130

1865

3

1455

1284

100

1279

5

1170

92

10

92

0

92

The Office of Pest Management (OPM) has an internet based license renewal system – RenewEZ; which
processed 80% of all renewals received in FY2014. All certifications and licenses expired on May 31st.

OPM Testing
To show competency in the application of pesticides, an applicant must be certified. To be certified an
applicant must score at least a 75% on their respective certification exams. A new applicant must pass
the Core and at least one Category-Specific exam. To broaden an existing certification, an applicator
must pass the category-specific exam that they applied for. Since July of 2003, through an RFP process,
the OPM’s exams have been administered by Metro Institute, Inc. (Metro), an independent testing
vendor, by way of a computer-based testing system. Certified Applicator and Qualified Applicator
applicants submit their application to the OPM. Upon approval of the application, the OPM transfers the
applicant’s information and the categories the applicant is eligible to take to Metro. Metro has test
centers in Phoenix, Glendale, Tucson, Flagstaff, Prescott, Kingman, and Yuma.
The following table shows the total number of exams administered over the last 11 fiscal years.
Fiscal Year
2004
No. of Exams
5,067
Administered

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

5,825

8,585

7,732

7,145

4,833

4,467

4,111

4,284

5,390

4,265

56

OPM Exams Administered in FY 2014

64.0%

Average
Passing
Score
82.4%

Average
Failing
Score
65.6%

385

49.9%

80.8%

66.5%

1.3

Aquatics

32

59.4%

83.3%

59.6%

1.2

Fumigation
Industrial &
Institutional
Ornamental & Turf
Right-of-Way
Wood-Destroying
Organism Mgmt.
Wood-Destroying
Insect Inspection
Wood Preservation
Core
National Core
Aquatics
Fumigation
Industrial &
Institutional
Ornamental & Turf
Right-of-Way
Wood-Destroying
Organism Mgmt.
Wood-Destroying
Insect Inspection
Wood Preservation

17

41.2%

79.1%

59.4%

1.7

935

51.9%

80.7%

67.0%

1.5

406
432

44.6%
43.5%

81.8%
81.1%

63.9%
62.5%

1.4
1.4

476

44.1%

80.1%

65.6%

1.6

33

39.4%

79.4%

62.9%

1.3

9
112
36
5
8

11.1%
44.6%
88.9%
60.0%
37.5%

80.8%
80.1%
83.3%
79.7%
78.5%

66.6%
65.5%
69.8%
46.0%
59.2%

3
1.4
1.0
1.3
1.3

105

62.9%

80.7%

66.4%

1.3

75
50

69.3%
66.0%

82.3%
80.4%

66.3%
66.6%

1.2
1.3

102

45.1%

79.9%

65.7%

1.6

8

37.5%

80.0%

57.6%

1

5
4,265

20.0%
50.8%

77.3%
71.9%

60.2%
80.5%

2.0
1.4

License Type

Exams

Total
Exams

Percent
Passed

Certified Applicator

Core

1020

Certified Applicator

National Core

Certified Applicator
Certified Applicator
Certified Applicator
Certified Applicator
Certified Applicator
Certified Applicator
Certified Applicator
Certified Applicator
Qualified Applicator
Qualified Applicator
Qualified Applicator
Qualified Applicator
Qualified Applicator
Qualified Applicator
Qualified Applicator
Qualified Applicator
Qualified Applicator
Qualified Applicator
TOTALS

Average
Attempts
1.2

The average number of attempts is greater than one, which shows that some of the applicants are
unprepared before taking the exam for the first time. This also is reflected in the “percent passed”. We
strongly recommend that applicants study before attempting to take any test. The OPM has a list of
recommended study materials, from which the exams were created. Additionally, the OPM offers Initial
License Training classes and is aware of at least two private entities that offer initial examination training
on a regular basis.
CONTINUING EDUCATION APPLICATIONS
OPM FY 2014 Applications Received
684

FY 2014 Courses Approved
664

Denied
20

During FY 2014 many training sessions were held that provided credential holders the opportunity to earn
credits. Total credit hours granted to educational programs for continuing education totaled 839.5 hours.

57

OPM Compliance
Inspections
One of the goals of the Office of Pest Management (Office) Compliance Section is to protect the public by
taking steps to reduce the incidence of pesticide misuse. The Office accomplishes this goal by conducting
field inspections of applicators engaged in the application, storage, and disposal of pesticides.
The Office’s six compliance inspectors performed 1,295 pesticide use inspections which encompass all
categories for which the Office issues licenses (general pest, wood destroying treatment, et. al), and in
many different settings, including residential, food-handling, schools, childcare facilities, golf courses, and
health care facilities.
Inspections of pesticide application records and pesticide storage areas are performed at offices and on
service vehicles operated by pest control businesses. The maintenance of accurate treatment records is
essential as it allows inspectors to determine if a pesticide was applied correctly (e.g. Is the site on the
label, was the concentrate mixed according to label directions? Was the correct amount applied to the area
treated? etc…). OPM compliance staff conducted 1,052 non-use inspections, noting 182 violations in
FY2014.

Pretreatment monitoring
Inspectors utilize follow-up inspections, also known as “Consumer Protection Monitors (or CPMs)”, to
determine if consumers received a termite pretreatment that complies with state and federal requirements.
This monitoring program does not disrupt the work schedule of a business, qualifying party or applicator,
as it does not involve interaction with them, unless a violation is found. Rather, the inspector, visits newly
constructed areas, views the pretreatment tag the applicator is required to attach to the site, after he
performs a pretreatment. Then, the inspector measures the site, calculates the amount of termiticide that
should be applied and compares his findings with the information the applicator documents on the tag.
The inspector uses the preteat tag to not only verify the proper quantity, strength, and dosage, of
termiticide to a site, but also to determine if the business performing the treatment is reporting the
treatments to the Office as required by Law. In FY 2014, OPM inspectors performed 204 Consumer
Protection Monitors.

Investigations
The Office conducted 98 inquiry investigations in FY 2014 with approximately 61% of these becoming
formal complaints. Inquiries are “threshold investigations”. Basically, it’s a preliminary investigation, which
takes no more than 30 to 60 calendar days for Compliance staff to determine if there is evidence of a
violation or not. Inquiries come from consumers, licensees, agency Staff, or referrals from the USEPA or
other State or local government agencies.

Complaints and the Complaint Database
The OPM issues a citation only after the Compliance Manager, Attorney and Acting Director have conducted
a thorough review of the investigative report and have determined that a violation meriting disciplinary
action has occurred. To maintain consistency, the Compliance Manager utilizes an Enforcement Response
Policy (ERP) these guidelines take into account case specific factors, and provides guidance in the
determination of the appropriate disciplinary action. Penalties may include, administrative warnings, civil

58

penalties of up to $1000, or license suspension/revocation for the most egregious violations. In FY 2014
the OPM adjudicated 67 complaints.
Consumers can visit http://www.sb.state.az.us/ and look under the Complaints link to view the
complaint history of any respondent whom the OPM has opened and adjudicated a complaint.
Type of Disciplinary Action
Administrative Warnings

Number
49

Civil Penalties

$12,650.00

Number of cases that involved Civil Penalties

36

License Suspensions

3

License Revocations

0

Dismissals

3

Cease and Desist Orders

16

Type of penalties associated with the 67 adjudicated complaints

Continuing Education (CE)
Individuals holding an applicator certification and those holding a certified qualified applicator license are
required to obtain 6-hours of CE and 12 hours of CE respectively, per year. While commercial CE providers
offer training on new pesticide technologies, equipment, application techniques, and business practices,
OPM staff offered training regarding Rules and Statutes (e.g. applicator and qualifying party responsibilities,
proper record keeping (essentially, how to stay out of trouble)). In FY2014 compliance staff provided CE
classes in Phoenix, Tucson, Yuma and Prescott to 224 applicators.
Location
Phoenix
Tucson
Yuma
Prescott

Continuing Education provided in FY2014

Number of Attendees
111
29
19
65

Outreach
In FY2014 compliance staff spoke to industry members or participating in CE classes, addressing the new
Laws and Rules. Staff provided Laws and Rules education to a total of 1082 license holders. Additionally,
compliance staff participated in 3 tribal training classes, whereby a total of 106 tribal inspectors received
instructions on OPM laws and inspection guidelines.

School and Childcare Visits
State law requires that pesticide applications in schools and child care facilities be performed only by
licensed persons and only after the licensee provides the school or child care facility with a minimum of 72hours advance notification (pursuant to ARS 32-2307). This fiscal year, inspectors visited 34 school and
child care facilities to confirm that pesticides were applied by appropriately licensed persons, and that

59

employees, students, and parents, were provided the proper information and warnings of impending
pesticide treatments.

60

Plant Services Division (PSD)
The mission of the Plant Services Division is to safeguard agriculture, food
and the environment from the risks associated with the entry,
establishment and spread of plant pests, diseases and noxious weeds
thereby promoting agricultural sustainability, market access and
competitiveness.

Pest Exclusion and Management
Increased Threat of Pests
Increased execution of various trade agreements has resulted in a higher incidence of trade into and out
of the United States and, subsequently, Arizona. Many pests common to foreign countries present a
significant threat to Arizona’s agricultural industry, public well-being and associated quality of life. As more
commerce enters Arizona, and significant weather events continue, the risk of introducing plant pests or
diseases from other states or foreign countries increases.
One serious pest threat presently pressuring Arizona is the most devastating disease known to affect
citrus worldwide, citrus greening, or Huanglongbing (HLB). The disease affects all species of the citrus
family and once a tree is infected, there is no known cure. Within a few years the fruit becomes bitter
and useable and the tree will eventually die. The disease has been found throughout Florida and portions
of Texas, Louisiana, South Carolina and Mexico. The presence of the disease has had a significant impact
to the economy and employment in affected production areas. Although the disease has not been
detected in the State, in 2009 the vector that transmits the disease (the Asian citrus psyllid) was
discovered in Yuma County, near the border with Mexico. Since then, the vector has advanced to other
areas of the state putting commercial citrus production and the citrus nursery stock markets at risk.
Even with multiple safeguarding measures in place, the risk of introducing the disease to the State is
significant. With the trade of commerce that can harbor infected material, the increase of detections of the
disease and vector in neighboring states and countries, and the illegal movement of infected plants from
one area to another, are factors in making it increasingly difficult to exclude the disease from the State.
Maintaining a viable front to limit the introduction of the disease and quickly responding to a new detection
will be vital in protecting Arizona’s citrus form this potentially devastating disease.
In addition, the potential for introduction of a devastating plant pest or disease of pecans and other tree
nuts is high due to pest pressures in New Mexico and Mexico. Arizona has seen significant growth in the
production of tree nuts and an increase in the amount of tree nuts shipped into the State for processing.
Associated with this expansion and movement, is the prominent increase in the potential for introduction
of a dangerous plant pest or disease through the transport of commodities back and forth across interstate
and international borders.
Specifically, one of the biggest pest threats comes from the pecan weevil. The pecan weevil is the most
devastating pest of pecans in the United States. The pecan weevil is found from New York to Iowa, south
to Oklahoma, and across the southeastern states from Florida to Texas. Occasionally the weevil is found in
New Mexico, but in that area the pest is under eradication, thereby limiting its movement further west.
Other pests of concern include pecan casebearer, hickory shuckworm, and pecan phylloxera.

61

The Division, in partnership with stakeholders, is able to validate that clean product is exported from the
State and safeguard our nut industry by vigorously inspecting facilities that receive and process tree nuts
from local sources and from other states and countries. A pheromone trapping system is also utilized to
identify potential threats in commercial nut production groves that act as a first line of defense for early
response, and provides the best opportunity to identify an emerging pest issue and mitigate the problem
in a timely manner.

Dangers
Introduction of non-native plant pests can have devastating effects on the yield of agricultural and
horticultural commodities, and can increase industry production costs through pesticide applications for
eradication or control of destructive pests. Plant pests reduce the quality and marketability of products and
threaten the demand for Arizona products.
Metropolitan Phoenix is among the nation’s largest cities and growing. This unprecedented growth has
fueled significant increases in the importation and distribution of plants, many of which originate in parts
of the country already infested with devastating and costly exotic pests such as the Light brown apple moth
that can have a serious effect on a number of plant species or the Asian long-horned beetle that is a
devastating wood borer.

Pest Exclusion Safety Nets
The Pest Exclusion and Management Program has moved to incorporate new technologies, advanced
inspector training and updated quarantine requirements. Intensive pest-trapping methods are used to meet
the challenges of rapid urban development, increased trade and expanded export opportunities for
Arizona’s agricultural industry.

Free-From Status
Arizona continues to enjoy freedom from numerous exotic pests that have cost infested states millions of
dollars in attempted control or eradication. Through efforts to exclude, detect and mitigate exotic species
establishment, the Arizona Department of Agriculture protects the quality of Arizona life and market access
for our agricultural commodities produced here.

Arizona’s Top Ten Most Unwanted Agricultural Pests


Citrus Greening — poses a serious threat to Arizona’s
citrus trees now that the vector of the disease, the Asian
citrus psyllid, has made its way into Arizona. Trees infected
with citrus greening, also known as Huanglongbing, may
produce misshapen, unmarketable, bitter fruit. Other than
tree removal, there is no known cure for the disease. In
areas of the world affected by citrus greening the average
productive lifespan of citrus trees has dropped from 50 or
more years to 15 or less. Trees in orchards usually die 3-5
years after becoming infected and require removal and
replanting. An infected tree produces fruit that is unsuitable
for sale as fresh fruit or for juice and the tree eventually
dies.
HLB infected and healthy citrus leaves University of Florida

62

Regulatory restrictions are in place for Florida, Georgia, Puerto
Rico and portions of California, Texas, Louisiana and South
Carolina for citrus greening; for the Asian citrus psyllid,
Alabama, Texas, Mississippi, Florida, Hawaii, Guam, and
portions of Louisiana, California, South Carolina and Arizona.
Citrus greening – H.D. Catling



Pecan Weevil – attacks the pecan nut, causing serious crop loss. The larvae (grubs) develop inside
nuts and destroy the entire kernel by their feeding process. The nearest infestation of pecan weevil is
in New Mexico. Arizona Administrative Code R3-4-231 restricts the entry of pecans, other nuts, and
firewood to prevent movement of pecan weevil into the state.

White larvae (grubs) destroying the inside
of a pecan H C Ellis, University of Georgia



Mature weevil Clemson University - USDA Cooperative
Extension

Red Palm Weevil – The red palm weevil is a major plant pest of palm trees and was discovered for
the first time in the U.S. in 2011 at a residence in California. The red palm weevil can have severe
effects to production date palms and other ornamental and native palms found in Arizona.

Adult Red Palm Weevil John Kabashima, UC Cooperative
Extension

White larvae (grubs) with cocoon made
from palm fibers Mike Lewis, Center for Invasive Species
Research

63



South American Palm Weevil – The South American Palm Weevil is a major pest of concern due to
the Red Ring Nematode carried by the weevil that is spread to healthy palms in the landscape and
commercial date groves causing Red Ring Disease. Red Ring Disease can be fatal in as little as five
months to several species of palms, including date and fan palms, two popular palms in Arizona.
Currently the weevil, but not the disease, has been detected in the southern border regions of both
California and Texas.

Adult South American Palm Weevil Pest and Diseases Image Library,
Bugwood.org



Tell-tale red ring in cross-section of a
palm infested by red ring nematodeSociety of Nematologists slide collection

Japanese beetle — defoliates ornamental plants and destroys turf roots
resulting in decline or death; threatens the quality of golf courses, parks,
and lawns, and export potential of Arizona’s green industry. Three of
Arizona’s neighboring states (Colorado, Utah, and New Mexico) are battling
infestations of Japanese beetle. National harmonized regulatory
requirements aid in preventing the interstate spread of this pest on nursery
stock and other conveyances. Federal rule regulates the movement of
aircraft departing from infested areas.

Adults feeding on a grapevine leaf
- USDA

Japanese beetle grubs destroy turf
by feeding on underground roots –
M.G. Klein, USDA-ARS

64

Japanese beetle adult David Cappaert, Michigan
State University



Gypsy Moth — is one of the most destructive defoliators of hard and softwood trees. Gypsy
moth caterpillars feed on the leaves of more than 500 species of trees and shrubs. Larvae
damage trees by eating the foliage, which weakens and eventually kills them, affecting the
aesthetic value of forested areas and urban landscapes.

Gypsy Moth Larvae - USDA
Forest Service
Gypsy moth larvae have eaten
most of the foliage from this tree
- Haruta Ovidiu, University of Oradea



Fruit Flies – (Mediterranean, Mexican, Oriental, and Caribbean) — are devastating pests of citrus,
dates, and other types of fruit that impact quality and yield. Presence in Arizona would limit export
potential of citrus and date commodities. Federal rule restricts the movement of host material from
areas under quarantine to prevent the spread of infestations. Photos show fruit fly larvae in damaged
fruit.

Fruit Fly Larvae –
FDACS-DPI

Adult Mexican Fruit Fly –
Jack Dykinga, USDA-ARS

 Red Imported Fire Ant – An aggressive competitor with native
ant species, its aggressive behavior, and its ability to both sting
and bite threatens public well-being, quality of life, and
agricultural production, especially livestock. Presence in Arizona
would limit the export potential of the state’s green industry. In
appearance, the native Southern Fire Ant closely resembles the
Red Imported Fire Ant. Federal rule restricts movement of
regulated commodities from infested areas.

65

Fruit Fly Larvae –
FDACS-DPI

Imported Fire Ant – ADA-PSD



Giant African Snail – Considered one of the most damaging snails in the world. A prolific forager,
this species of snail can have devastating effects on a number of agricultural crops and ornamental
plants. Its slime can also be harmful to human health if
ingested from contaminated garden crops.

Giant African Snail – FDACS/DPI
Giant African Snail – USDA-PPQ



Khapra Beetle – (KHB) is considered one of the world’s worst pests of stored products. KHB thrives
in warm, dry climates, making it a significant pest risk for Arizona. Larvae are the most damaging
stage; adult KHB do not feed. KHB can damage 70% of stored grain it infests, resulting in significant
reduction of grain weight, grade and quality. In addition to grain damage, KHB larvae have barbed
hairs that can irritate the skin and respiratory tract and, if ingested in large numbers, can result in
serious gastrointestinal irritation. Adult KHB are flightless, and therefore, human transport of infested
commodities is the primary method of long distance dispersal.

Khapra Beetle - Ministry of
Agriculture and Regional
Development, Bugwood.org

Khapra Beetle - Ministry of
Agriculture and Regional
Development, Bugwood.org

Inspections
Inspection staff assigned to three operational locations (Phoenix, Tucson, Yuma) function as the primary
safety net against pests of concern. Inspectors carry out a variety of duties including survey and detection
pest trapping, issuance of certificates, field inspections for quarantine clearance and export certification in
seed and produce distribution centers, to serve the agricultural industry and contribute to the prevention
of pest establishment within the state. High risk locations and commodities that have the potential to harbor
a dangerous plant pest are inspected by the Division’s inspection personnel.

66

An Overview
In FY 2014, inspection staff intercepted 5,975 pests within the state’s interior through various inspections
with 311 of the pests intercepted identified as serious pests of concern; 1,603 federal phytosanitary
certificates were issued for the export of vegetable, agricultural, and ornamental seed, produce, nursery
stock, wood products, and various other agricultural commodities. Pre-clearance of plants for pests,
most notably citrus stock, before distribution within the State is a major inspection task.

Biological Identification Group

Digital imaging system ADA-PSD

With the Division’s addition of the Biological Identification Group,
identification of potential dangerous plant pests can be made accurately
and quickly. This affords inspection staff the ability to respond in a more
timely fashion to pest interceptions reducing the cost of potential
eradications and minimizing the impacts on commerce. The staff also plays
a key role in the development of Pest Risk Assessments and Economic
Impact Statements. This allows the Division to make accurate, real-time
decisions on pest mitigations and evaluating the threats to state’s
agriculture stakeholders.

Survey and Detection
The early detection of potential pests and delimiting surveys of pest infestations through trapping and
surveillance programs for a wide range of pests is the final safety net in the division’s pest interception
effort. This is a highly important component of our agricultural safeguarding system. Realistic trap densities
are one aspect of this system that may fluctuate within certain geographical area based on certain risk
factors. The main risk factors are:




Availability of suitable hosts
Climate conductive to the pest
Evidence of potential pest pathways within a community or local area, such as:
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o

Densely populated areas
Frequent travel to infested areas
Availability and demand for exotic fruits, vegetables and other plant material
Gardening groups and clubs specializing in rare plant propagation
Mail parcels from infested areas
Major ports of entry (land and air) and transportation routes
Wholesale marketing centers and street vendors
Historical trapping results

All of these risk factors must be taken into consideration when determining trap densities. Arizona is a state
with extreme uniqueness in climate, host distribution, and key potential pathways. As a result of this
uniqueness, a distinctive risk level description and resulting rotational strategy is required to allow trappers
to efficiently and effectively safeguard Arizona from exotic pests.
Statewide, an average of 7,182 traps were placed, serviced and monitored throughout FY 2014 for up to
15 targeted pest species. A majority of these traps are regularly serviced 2 times a month increasing their
effectiveness for detecting a dangerous plant pest before a major infestation is discovered.

67

Aggressive Detection
Foreign nations require scientific data to ensure that pests that inhabit Arizona will not harm their crops.
Because the division maintains an aggressive detection program to help protect that Federal free-from pest
distinction, Arizona’s agricultural producers can ship almost anywhere in the world and their products are
welcomed in many foreign markets. This kind of market access is unique and is the result of the Plant
Services Division’s commitment to protect Arizona industries.

Fruit Fly
In particular, many foreign nations are concerned about the fruit fly complex. Fruit flies, much like a wormy
apple, cause citrus fruit to be cosmetically unacceptable to consumers and increase spoilage in commercial
storage.
The division’s exotic fruit fly detection efforts involves monitoring an average
of 2,135 traps placed statewide and currently meets or exceeds the Federal
trapping protocols.

Fruit Fly adults –
FDACS-DPI

In FY 2014, inspectors continued to use all internationally accepted lures and
trapping arrays and techniques for a highly efficient detection strategy for all
exotic fruit fly species of concern. Add to this an ongoing training process for
fruit fly trapping personnel and a focused quality control system, and the result
is that Arizona citrus, both commercial and residential, is assured of appropriate
protection from a debilitating infestation from these destructive pests.

Nut Pest Monitoring
The nut industry, including pecans, pistachios, and walnuts, is a fast
growing agricultural industry within Arizona. Several devastating pests
exist within the nut producing states surrounding Arizona, but Arizona still
enjoys a pest free status. The division has developed and implemented a
detection strategy to monitor for the introduction of several of these pests,
including the Hickory Shuckworm, the Pecan Nut Casebearer, the Pecan
Weevil and the Walnut Husk Fly. Inspectors place traps in both commercial
and residential pecan environments in order to monitor for an introduction
of these devastating pests. In addition, Arizona pecan cleaning facilities are
inspected during the cleaning season each year to ensure Arizona pecans
are pest free and therefore able to enter the export market unhindered.

Commodity Inspection ADA-PSD

Hand in hand with producers and industry representatives, the division is leading this proactive endeavor
to keep Arizona-produced nuts free from pests of export significance, making Arizona-produced nuts a
commodity that is desired by many in this important export market.

68

Gypsy Moth

Gypsy Moth trap Chris Evans, River to River CWMA

Gypsy Moth, a devastating forest pest well established in the
northeastern United States, is a pest that is threatening Arizona's
forests. Leaf destruction caused by the feeding caterpillars weakens
trees and can lead to tree death. Once again, due to department
commitment, no reproducing gypsy moth population has been detected
in Arizona. Occasionally, a “hitchhiking” male moth has been detected
in traps placed at RV parks. The division maintains an active gypsy moth
trapping program including placement and servicing of traps on state
and private forestlands there were 358 Gypsy Moth traps placed during
this fiscal year at high risk locations. High-risk locations, such as RV
parks, are routinely trapped.

Citrus Greening/Asian Citrus Psyllid
Citrus in Arizona is a popular choice by many for the production of citrus fruit and nursery stock, and as an
ornamental landscape in many areas of the state. Citrus is under threat from a devastating disease, citrus
greening or Huanglongbing. A citrus tree, once infected, will eventually
die. The Plant Services Division has trained inspectors that carry out a
number of pest detection methods to detect the first sign of the disease
or the pest that carries the disease, the Asian Citrus Psyllid (ACP). The
Division, and through a partnership with the USDA, has deployed on
average 2,677 insect traps statewide. This endeavor has been successful
in allowing the Division to quickly respond and prevent further spread of
ACP and greatly reducing the risk of introduction of citrus greening. The
state also has safeguarding methods in place for producers of citrus
nursery stock through the Clean Citrus Stock Program. To date, the disease
Screened nursery facility has not been detected in the state.
ADA-PSD

Khapra Beetle

Grain facility - ADA-PSD

To secure the exportability of grain and stored dry products produced in
Arizona, methods are in place to detect early infestations of the
devastating Khapra beetle. During FY14, there were 276 traps were
placed and monitored. The Khapra beetle is one of the world's most
destructive stored-product pests. It is difficult to control once introduced
into a region because it feeds on a variety of dried materials, is resistant to
insecticides, and can go long periods without food. Infestations can result
in up to 70 percent grain damage, making products inedible and
unmarketable.

69

European Corn Borer

The European corn borer is a damaging pest that can jeopardize the quality
and exportability of corn grown in Arizona. The products that are produced for
export can be surveyed for European corn borer to meet the entry
requirements of other countries and/or states. Corn products that are
imported into Arizona must meet the entry requirements defined in A.A.C. R34-228: European Corn Borer.
European Corn Borer
Larvae - Keith Weller,
USDA-ARS

Japanese Beetle

The Japanese beetle is an aggressive feeder and reproduces at a high rate. They
can destroy turf grasses, ornamental plants, and many vegetable crops common
in Arizona. High risk areas are monitored for the pest and imported host product
must meet entry requirements found in nationally harmonized regulatory
requirements.

Japanese Beetle
Adult- Stephen
Ausmus, USDA-ARS

Palm Pests

The Red Palm Weevil and the South American Palm Weevil are major concerns to the ornamental palm
and palm date production areas of the state. These weevils can have major impacts on the health of
palm trees and can eventually kill a tree if not placed under control. The South American Palm Weevil can
also carry a nematode that can cause Red Ring Disease that can kill palm trees as well.

Commitment to Service
The Plant Services Division (PSD) continues its efforts to improve timeliness and quality of customer service
delivery and even though faced with the continued impact of budget reductions, reduced inspection staff
as well as numerous other pest challenges, PSD has demonstrated its commitment to service by the
following:

Export Certification
The division administers certification programs to facilitate interstate and international movement to
agricultural commodities. However, due to staffing reductions, the Division has transferred responsibility
for Federal Phytosanitary Certificate issuance back to USDA-APHIS in most geographies of the State.



Domestic shipments of nursery stock
In FY 2014, inspectors issued 1,436 single shipment certificates for shipments of agricultural commodities
to other states. Nursery stock accounted for 150 certificates.

70



Voluntary nursery certification program
In safeguarding the market access of Arizona produced nursery stock,
certification programs exist to certify a commodity to meet the
requirements of other states. Arizona produced nursery stock most
often is required to have a “General Nursery Stock Certification” (A.K.A.
Arizona Certified) that attests to the general health and freedom of
dangerous plant pests. Some states also require certification for specific
pest threats (i.e. Ozonium root rot, Brown garden snail, Rose mosaic,
etc.).
The Division also administers the state’s Clean Citrus Stock Program,
under Director’s Administrative Order DAO 11-6, which allows citrus
nursery stock producers to participate in a program that focuses on
maintaining a pest free status from the Asian citrus psyllid. The program allows establishments inside an
area under quarantine, within the state, for the Asian citrus psyllid to move their product to areas outside
of the quarantine under strict safeguarding measures. Some of the key guidelines for citrus nursery stock
are that material is produced in an approved screen house and follows a treatment and inspection protocol.
The Division received 278 applications during calendar year 2013 from Arizona nurseries requesting
certification to comply with the entry requirements of other states, and issued 254 individual certificates
following inspection of the applicants’ properties.
Nursery inspection - ADA-PSD

Types of Nursery Certifications Issued
4%
General Inspection
Certification

31%

31%

Brown Garden Snail
Ozonium Root Rot
Rose Mosaic Virus

34%

Export Enhancement
Arizona’s economy benefits greatly from the department’s strict maintenance of its aggressive pest
detection program. In previous years, government quarantine officials from the People’s Republic of China,
Chile, Argentina, Israel and Mexico reviewed the Division’s pest detection efforts to the end that more and
more foreign nations have opened their market, thus allowing Arizona producer’s greater financial growth
options.

71

Noxious Weeds
“Weed” is a term used to designate a pest plant. Certain imported or introduced (non-native) invasive
weeds are extremely destructive and labeled as noxious for regulatory purposes.
Some of Arizona’s Weeds of Major Concern
Giant salvinia
Russian knapweed
Leafy spurge
Camelthorn
Dalmatian toadflax
Onionweed

Buffelgrass
Yellow starthistle
Sweet resinbush
Diffuse knapweed
Hydrilla
Floating water hyacinth

Noxious Weeds for Sale
Often, non-native species have no natural enemies in new environments and, if exotic species are
aggressive, they may become weedy invaders in their new habitats. Plant Services Division inspectors find
prohibited plant species in retail seed displays, in display ponds and retail ethnic markets on occasion and
the product is restricted from sale.
Morning glory
vine (left) and
Floating water
hyacinth are
examples of
noxious
weeds found
for sale in
Arizona.
Morning Glory – Billy Craft

Floating Water Hyacinth
– Ted D. Center, USDA-ARS

Additional pathways for the distribution and sale of noxious weeds are through internet sales, peer to peer
auctions, plant exchanges amongst hobbyists and sale sites. These activities, and the potential movement
of noxious weed species, may inadvertently cause the introduction and an infestation of a noxious weed.

72