Otago apple growers have welcomed, with caution, news finally of success against Australia at the World Trade Organisation over the "festering sore" of non-tariff trade barriers being used to block the export of New Zealand pipfruit.
Sources say the WTO panel, which adjudicated the long-running dispute, comprehensively rejected the Australian defence, the transTasman political newsletter reported.
Pipfruit New Zealand chairman Ian Palmer told NZPA the Government had received the WTO decision, but had not briefed the grower organisation.
A Government spokeswoman confirmed yesterday it had received a draft report.
"We are satisfied the panel understood the arguments we put before it," she said.
"The confidential report, issued on March 31, has not yet been finalised, so we will now take this opportunity to analyse it and then provide our comments on the panel's conclusions."
The final report, due mid-year would be released publicly.
Otago Regional Fruitgrowers Committee chairman John Webb, of Cromwell, said if news of the success was true, it was marvellous, but he wanted to see the "fine print" and what "hurdles" New Zealand growers would have to go through to sell their apples in Australia.
Otago grower and Pipfruit New Zealand director Stephen Darling, of Ettrick, said the trade dispute had been a "festering sore" for nearly 90 years, so the news was welcome.
"It's great news for Otago and New Zealand growers, which is long overdue."
He thought it would have a beneficial impact for growers and that the supply of New Zealand apples into Australia would complement Australian fruit by lifting quality and choice for consumers.
Ettrick apple grower Con van der Voort said the decision was a "step in the right direction", but he doubted how beneficial it was going to be.
"I expect the Australians will oppose it."
New Zealand apples were first banned from Australia after fireblight was found in Northland, in 1919.
Though New Zealand scientists have found fireblight in Australian ornamental plants and shown that the bacterial disease is unlikely to be transmitted on mature, clean fruit, efforts to gain access to the potentially-lucrative Australian market in 1986, 1989, and 1995 were rejected.
Further talks over the restrictions also failed when access was allowed in 2006 with conditions - such as orchard inspections - so strict that exports would not be economically viable.
New Zealand took a complaint to the World Trade Organisation in 2007, on the basis that the proposed constraints were an unacceptable trade barrier.
Australian growers have said imports of New Zealand apples could cost the major pipfruit areas in New South Wales $A30 million ($NZ39 million) a year in lost sales, but since those estimates were made, the world's biggest apple-growing nation, China, has sought to also enter the market.
Biosecurity Australia said Chinese apples could be imported as long as risks from 18 pests of concern were a "very low level" but they were satisfied China does not have fireblight.