Assessing the Food and Environmental Safety and Economic Feasibility of Mobile Slaughter Units for Pasture Poultry Grower

Assessing the Food and Environmental Safety and Economic Feasibility of Mobile Slaughter Units for Pasture Poultry Grower

Summary

The demand for locally produced food in the United States continues to grow. Pasture poultry production is a sustainable farming system that has been adopted by many small-scale farmers in the Southeast and elsewhere. Pasture poultry farmers are at a significant disadvantage when it comes to addressing consumer demand for their locally produced chickens because birds processed on-farm are exempted from USDA inspection and do not qualify for USDA Inspected status. Due to this exemption, pasture poultry sales have been limited to sales to household consumers and very few food service market venues. The current Mobile Processing Unit (MPU) Initiative being discussed among pasture poultry farmers and non-profit organizations proposes a solution involving MPUs; a potential USDA inspected facility that could eliminate regulatory impasses, and increase marketability and profitability for farmers. The USDA-FSIS “Mobile Slaughter Unit Compliance Guide”1 provides recommendations for farmers who wish to obtain USDA-inspected status in accordance with FSIS regulations. Due to a lack of data, the guide recommends assessment of the food safety of MPU processing and resulting products, and assessment of the impact of disposal of processing waste on the farming environment. Obtaining the data will help farmers to fulfill a large part of the federal inspection requirements.  Since MPU processing would require a substantial economic investment by farmers with already limited resources, an evaluation of the economic feasibility of MPU processing and marketability of the products in comparison with current processing methods would allow farmers to strategize the most beneficial method of pasture poultry production.

Objectives/Performance Targets

The goals of this project were to: 1) determine the food safety risk of MPU processing and product compared to on-farm and processing at small USDA facilities, 2) assess the impact of MPU waste disposal on the environment compared to the other types of processing, 3) assess the economic feasibility of pasture poultry processing using MPU versus other types of processing, and 4) evaluate the consumers’ willingness to pay (WTP) for pasture poultry versus other non-local chicken brands. Information dissemination of the research findings to pasture poultry farmers and training the farmers on food safety, Hazard Analysis Critical Control Points (HACCP) programs and Good Agriculture Practices (GAPs) for MPU will be conducted. Knowledge gained from this project will support the pasture poultry farmers by fulfilling a large part of the federal inspection requirements on food safety and environmental impact of MPU processing and products. The project will also generate valuable data to farmers on the economic feasibility of MPU and the market access by examining consumers’ WTP for local products. This will allow them to strategic budgetary decisions with less infrastructure investment risk. This application conforms to organic farming systems priority on evaluation of the biological (microbial contamination) and economic (feasibility and marketability) processes associated with MPU processing/production of organic (all-natural) pasture poultry production systems in the Southeast. The proposed study addresses the mission of the Southern SARE program by assessing the food safety, environment, economics, marketability of agriculture practices (i.e., MPU versus on-farm and small USDA facility processing) that is expected to greatly benefit small-sized pasture poultry farmers and their families.

Accomplishments/Milestones

The following is a summary of the studies and activities, by objective, accomplished during 2013:

Objectives 1: determine the food safety risk of MPU processing and product compared to on-farm and processing at small USDA facilities.

This work has been published in a peer review journal:

Trimble, L. M., W. Q. Alali, K. E. Gibson, S. C. Ricke, P. Crandall, D. Jaroni, M. Berrang. 2013. Salmonella and Campylobacter prevalence and concentration on pasture-raised broilers processed on-farm, in a mobile processing unit, and at small USDA-inspected facilities. Food Control. 34: 177-182.

Abstract:

The small-scale, pasture-raised poultry production model is a growing niche in the locally grown food movement. Research that focuses on the food safety of small-scale broiler processing methods is limited. The objective of this study was to compare Salmonella and Campylobacter prevalence and concentrations on pasture-raised broilers processed on-farm, in a small United States Department of Agriculture Inspected slaughter facility (USDA-IF), and in a Mobile Processing Unit (MPU) pilot plant. A total of 120, 100, and 50 post-chill, pasture-raised broiler carcasses were sampled from each processing method, respectively. Pathogen prevalence and concentrations from whole carcass rinses were determined using a 3-tube Most Probable Number (MPN) method for Salmonella and direct plating method for Campylobacter according to the USDA-Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) protocols. Both Salmonella prevalence and concentrations on-farm (89% and 1.78 MPN/carcass [95% CI: 1.60e1.96]), USDA-IF (43% and 0.78 MPN/carcass [95% CI: 0.58-0.98]) were significantly (P < 0.05) different. Salmonella was not detected on carcasses processed via the MPU. Campylobacter prevalence was not significantly (P > 0.05) different on carcasses processed by the three methods (70% on-farm, 82% USDA-IF, and 100% MPU). The mean log10  Campylobacter concentrations in MPU processed carcasses (5.44 log10 CFU/carcass [95% CI: 5.24 -5.63]) was significantly higher (P < 0.05) compared to on-farm (2.32 log10 CFU/carcass [95% CI: 2.06-2.80]) and USDA-IF (2.44 log10 CFU/carcass [95% CI: 2.03-2.85]). Based on the results of this baseline study, most pasture-raised broilers processed by the three methods were contaminated with Salmonella and/or Campylobacter. Further research is needed to assess other potential risk factors such as farm and regional variations that may contribute to the differences in pathogens’ prevalence and concentrations.

Objective 2: Assess the impact of MPU waste disposal on the environment compared to the other types of processing

This work has been published in a peer review journal:

Trimble, L. M., W. Q. Alali, K. E. Gibson, S. C. Ricke, P. Crandall, D. Jaroni, M. Berrang, M. Y. Habteselassie. 2013. Prevalence and concentration of Salmonella and Campylobacter in the processing environment of small-scale pastured broiler farms Poul. Sci. 92: 3060-3066.

Abstract

A growing niche in the locally grown food movement is the small-scale production of broiler chickens using the pasture-raised poultry production model. Limited research exists that focuses on Salmonella and Campylobacter contamination in the environment associated with on-farm processing of pasture-raised broilers. The objective of this study was to establish data relative to Salmonella and Campylobacter prevalence and concentration in soil and mortality compost resulting from prior processing waste disposal in the small-scale, on-farm broiler processing environment. Salmonella and Campylobacter concentrations were determined in soil (n = 42), compost (n = 39), and processing wastewater (PWW; n = 46) samples from 4 small broiler farms using a 3-tube most probable number (MPN) method for Salmonella and direct plating method for Campylobacter. Salmonella prevalence and concentration (mean log10 MPN per sample weight or volume) in soil [60%, 0.97 (95% CI: 0.66 to 1.27)], compost [64%, 0.95 (95% CI: 0.66 to 1.24)], and wastewater [48%, 1.29 (95% CI: 0.87 to 1.71)] were not significantly different (P > 0.05). Although Campylobacter prevalence was not significantly different by sample type (64.3, 64.3, and 45.7% in soil, compost, and PWW, respectively), the concentration (mean log10 cfu) of this pathogen was significantly lower (P < 0.05) in wastewater [2.19 (95% CI: 0.36 to 3.03)] samples compared with soil [3.08 (95% CI: 2.23 to 3.94)], and compost [3.83 (95% CI: 2.71 to 4.95)]. These data provide insight into small scale poultry production waste disposal practices and provides a record of data that may serve as a guide for future improvement of these practices. Further research is needed regarding the small-scale broiler production environment in relation to improving disposal of processing waste for optimum control of human pathogens.

Objective 3: Assess the economic feasibility of pasture poultry processing using MPU versus other types of processing.

This work for this objective has been completed and currently undergoing data analysis and manuscript writeup.

Abstract

We examine the cost effectiveness of mobile processing units (MPUs) for poultry and contrast it with the two most popular alternatives; the traditional stationary on farm plant and the off farm processing facility. First, we provide evidence based on a review of previous academic research on these three poultry processing systems. Second, we show the results of a survey that we conducted with pasture poultry farmers in Georgia, Louisiana, and Arkansas. Results suggest that, on average, the three processing alternatives have similar processing costs. However, there are differences in investment costs, utilization, and product price that can make MPUs more profitable than the other two alternatives.

Objective 4. Evaluate the consumers’ willingness to pay (WTP) for pasture poultry versus other non-local chicken brands.

Investigators at University of Arkansas (Co-Pis) have received the IRB approval and developed the survey questionnaire. They are currently working on survey administration and distribution to participants.

Education/outreach objective:

1. An invited talk by the International Association for Food Protection (IAFP) to Dr. Alali was given at the “Ecology of Campylobacter and Salmonella in pasture poultry/mixed farm and their control with natural organic antimicrobials” symposium. The title of his talk was “Salmonella & Campylobacter in pasture poultry production system”, Charlotte, NC. July 29, 2013.
2. Poster presentation at the Southern Sustainable Agriculture Working Group annual conference by Lisa Trimble titled “Food and Environmental Safety of Pastured Poultry Processed On-farm, in a Mobile Processing Unit or at a USDA-Inspected Facility in the Southeastern United States”.  Mobile, AL.
3. Poster presentation at the IAFP annual conference by Lisa Trimble titled “Food and Environmental Safety of Pastured Poultry Processed On-farm, in a Mobile Processing Unit or at a USDA-Inspected Facility in the Southeastern United States”.  Charlotte, NC.
4. Poster presentation at the annual Center for Food Safety meeting by Lisa Trimble titled “Food and Environmental Safety of Pastured Poultry Processed On-farm, in a Mobile Processing Unit or at a USDA-Inspected Facility in the Southeastern United States”.  Atlanta, GA. March 4, 2013.

Impacts and Contributions/Outcomes

The research project benefits the pastured poultry producers by:

1. Providing pastured poultry producers with data to improve the food safety of the pasture broiler carcasses by reducing Salmonella and Campylobacter contamination prevalence regardless of the processing method
2. Informing pastured poultry producers that in term of food safety; there is no single processing method where chicken carcasses have Salmonella and/or Campylobacter positive contamination prevalence below 40% (considered high when compared to commercially processed chickens).
3. Informing pastured poultry producers that process their chickens on-farm (on-site) that waste disposal is a potential source for pathogen dissemination to the environment (soil and compost).

Publications

1. Trimble, L. M., W. Q. Alali, K. E. Gibson, S. C. Ricke, P. Crandall, D. Jaroni, M. Berrang. 2013. Salmonella and Campylobacter prevalence and concentration on pasture-raised broilers processed on-farm, in a mobile processing unit, and at small USDA-inspected facilities. Food Control. 34: 177-182.
2. Trimble, L. M., W. Q. Alali, K. E. Gibson, S. C. Ricke, P. Crandall, D. Jaroni, M. Berrang, M. Y. Habteselassie. 2013. Prevalence and concentration of Salmonella and Campylobacter in the processing environment of small-scale pastured broiler farms Poul. Sci. 92: 3060-3066.
3. Van Loo, E.J., W. Q. Alali, S. Welander, C. A. O’Bryan, P. G. Crandall,  and S.C. Ricke 2013. Independent poultry processing in Georgia: survey of producers’ perspective. Agric., Food, Anal. Bacteriol. 3: 70-77
4. Davis, M.L., P.G. Crandall, C.A. O’Bryan, G. Kostadini, K. E. Gibson, W. Q. Alali, D. Jaroni, S.C. Ricke, and J.A. Marcy. 2013. Mobile poultry processing units: a safe and cost-effective poultry processing option for the small-scale farmer. J. Appl. Poultry Res. (under review).

Collaborators: