1 / 10

ACAF 09/17 Annex I

ACAF 09/17 Annex I . Advisory Committee on Animal Feedingstuffs 48th Meeting of ACAF on 3 December 2009 Discussion Paper Mycotoxins in Animal Feed Presentation by Dr Ray Smith November 2009. Introduction. Feed mycotoxin legislation Enforcement of controls Non-compliant consignments

dagan
Télécharger la présentation

ACAF 09/17 Annex I

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ACAF 09/17Annex I Advisory Committee on Animal Feedingstuffs 48th Meeting of ACAF on 3 December 2009 Discussion Paper Mycotoxins in Animal Feed Presentation by Dr Ray Smith November 2009

  2. Introduction • Feed mycotoxin legislation • Enforcement of controls • Non-compliant consignments • Review of current controls • Mycotoxin ‘binders’

  3. Feed mycotoxin legislation - 1 Specific controls exist for: • Aflatoxin B1 (AFB1) – maximum limits in compound feed and feed materials under the undesirable substances in feed Directive (2002/32). • Deoxynivenalol (DON), zearalenone (ZON), ochratoxin A (OA) and Fumonisin B1 + B2 now have guidance values under Commission Recommendation 2006/576.

  4. Feed mycotoxin legislation - 2 2006/576 also recommends that: • Member States and feed business operators (FBOs) work to increase monitoring for DON, ZON, OA, fumonisin B1 + B2, T-2 and HT-2 in feed; • samples to be analysed for all of the above mycotoxins; • special attention to be paid to by- or co-products used in feed;

  5. Feed mycotoxin legislation - 3 • Member States to ensure that FBOs use HACCP to help reduce or eliminate hazards; • analytical data to be provided to the Commission for compilation into a single database; and • a reassessment of the ‘guidance value’ approach be undertaken by 2009. Should we maintain the status quo?

  6. Enforcement of controls - 1 • The responsibility for enforcement of the maximum limits for AFB1 falls to local authority trading standards offices in Great Britain, and the Department of Agriculture in Northern Ireland. • The guidance values for DON, ZON, OA and fumonisins B1 + B2 are not statutory limits that require enforcement in the normal manner.

  7. Enforcement of controls - 2 • For 2008/2009 the analytical data from UK enforcement offices for feeds provided to the Commission showed no samples were found to exceed guidance values. Some consignments (ca. 10% of those sampled) of groundnuts and compound feed for wild/pet birds were found to contain excess levels of AFB1. • No consignments of home-produced grain for 2009 have been reported as exceeding the appropriate guidance values.

  8. Non-compliant consignments – guidance value approach • Difficult for enforcement officers to prevent the use of feeds that exceed a relevant guidance value. • Commission Recommendation 2006/576 does not prevent ‘blending down’ of feeds with less contaminated consignments or batches. • Can be used for ‘technical purposes’.

  9. Mycotoxin ‘binders’ - 1 Commission Regulation 386/2009 provides for a new functional group of feed additives: ‘substances for additional reduction of contamination by mycotoxins’. This will provide controls for certain products that are intended to attenuate the effects of mycotoxins found in feed. Cannot be used to ‘recover’ non-compliant feeds.

  10. Mycotoxin ‘binders’ - 2 Products in use include substances authorised as ‘binders’ (e.g. inorganic silicates) and cell wall components. Effectiveness? It’s possible that some products might be considered to be feed materials and not require feed additive authorisation. -Who decides? -Claims? -Supporting scientific data? -Effect on enforcement activities?

More Related