I think the point being made is that when the AFB PMP was thought up, the only practicable way to identify AFB was the use of the likes of the rope test, So only equipment with symptoms is destroyedThe NZBI discussion document refers to a "bargain that may never had been made explicit". It seems to be saying that beekeepers have agreed to find and destroy clinical cases of AFB without compensation. But that if other means - spore testing - were to be used, then compensation would have to be paid.
There is no connection whatsoever between compensation and the means by which AFB can be identified...
Lately there has been a push to use a cheapish PCR testing to identify spores and peer group pressure by some try to push for the destruction of hives based on this new test. It must be remembered that there is little if any scientific peer review on what finding spores in hive and honey equate to.
So a change to hive destruction based on PCR spore testing may result in large numbers of hives being burnt that dont show symptoms of AFB
If this change was to happen it would be a major change to the way the PMP works which could justify the payment of compensation
Some one did ask on this forum if the test could distinguish between viable DNA and non viable No answer was given by JohnF. This question is very important if you wax dip for example your AFB equipment as there will still be AFB DNA on the equipment.
It maybe that if spore testing is used to order destruction, clean equipment may be unnecessarily destroyed.