Poultry Processing Concept Could 'Revolutionize' Industry

Originally published in the Sept. 4, 2013, issue

 

By Dallas Duncan

Generally, students are expected to pay attention in class. But for University of Georgia poultry science graduate Eric Ayers, daydreaming during lecture could actually pay off.

He remembered professor Scott Russell telling him that if he could develop a poultry harvesting system that would save water and save the carcass, he’d have “a billion dollar idea.”

“It actually hit me in the side of the face one day,” Ayers said. “For the remainder of the class, I just drew and drew and drew, just drawing what I had in my head. I immediately went up to him and asked if I could have 10 minutes of his time … After that, he advised me to start looking for investors.”

Ayers, now a regional account manager with Water Management Resources, is finding a way to turn his classroom drawings into a tangible piece of equipment.

“It’s based on the time-old concept of using rubber fingers to remove feathers. The machine itself is not a new concept, but the style of finger that I have developed is what sets it apart from any other unit,” Ayers said. “It allows you to reduce water while using the system, because technically you won’t need any water with the design of these fingers.”

The concept is designed to reduce wing breakage and carcass damage, which are costly to the poultry industry.

The defeathering machines on the market now use rubber fingers that rotate to knock feathers off the bird carcass. Portions of a carcass damaged by rubber fingers have to be cut off and discarded.

“It’s a yield loss thing,” Russell, a former poultry science professor of Ayers’, said. “Wings are $1.25 a pound. If you’re breaking wings, you’re losing that money.”

Though it took a little while to find backers for his concept, Ayers developed a partnership and has plans to patent and develop the project, though is not sure what his timeline will be. The rubber finger concept he’s developing can cost upwards of $6,000 to make one mold – and if that mold doesn’t work, it’s back to the drawing board and he’s out several thousand more dollars.

“You want to make sure you have a solid concept. You want to make sure you have that kind of money to go ahead and develop instead of dragging it out,” he said. “My machine will only be able to use my fingers, and my fingers will only be able to be used in my machine.”

Russell said there have not been significant developments in the picking, or plucking, portion of poultry processing since the 1960s.

“It’s worked well and people think why fix it if it’s not broken, but the reality is there is a lot of issues with current picker systems,” Russell said.

Aside from the issues of carcass damage, another concern with existing machinery is the amount of water used. Though Ayers’ concept will not be completely devoid of water, he plans for it to reduce the amount needed.

“It’s good at what it does, because it clears the chickens of all the feathers and the same concept has been used for 30 years,” Ayers said. “The huge downfalls are that it does beat up the bird [carcass]. It damages the bird in a way that decreases profit. It also uses water to wash down the feathers.”

These systems use between five and seven gallons of water per bird. That’s because unlike beef, pork and lamb, where the hide is exposed to bacteria and thus removed, the skin of the chicken is what has the potential to come into contact with fecal and bacterial material in the processing facility. It takes more water to wash the poultry carcass to keep these things at bay, Russell said.

“Water usage is very, very expensive. [Poultry plants] use a million to a million and a half gallons every day. They have to pay for the water and pay for the water to be treated,” Russell said. “In the picker systems they use a lot of water to spray over the birds and wash the feathers. If you don’t have to use all the water to pick that bird, it’s a lot of water savings.”

With that in mind, he said there is potential for Ayers’ concept to take flight in the poultry processing industry.

“It’s really amazing that Eric was sitting in class and just used that opportunity to come up with something new … something completely unthought of that revolutionizes the way we do things, and I think it might just do that,” Russell said.

Guest Blog: Quest to Feed a Hungry World Continues

Courtesy Georgia FACES

ANGLE

By J. Scott Angle, dean of the University of Georgia College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences

Agricultural scientist Norman Borlaug was known as many things during his lifetime: Nobel Peace Prize winner, father of the Green Revolution, a persistent pioneer in the battle to end hunger. Few can dispute that during his 95 years, he was responsible for saving more human lives than anyone in history.

Today, he would have turned 100.

“You can’t build a peaceful world on empty stomachs and human misery,” Bourlaug once said.

Today, we are reminded he was a living example of the power of science to improve the world. He was the picture of practicing what you preach. He certainly did his part to fill empty stomachs and end human misery.

Borlaug developed dozens of cereal grain varieties that grew well in Asia, Mexico and Africa – areas of the world that had spent years facing mass famine and starvation. Scholars say he prevented as many as 1 billion deaths.

"There can be no permanent progress in the battle against hunger until the agencies that fight for increased food production and those that fight for population control unite in a common effort,” he said during his 1970 Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech.

Today, we again face a growing population that will outpace food production if we don’t find a way to double our yields — this time with less land and less water. Borlaug was fast to point out that meeting the challenges that led to the Green Revolution took many scientists, farmers, agencies and organizations working together. The same will be true of the grand challenge before us now. And the solutions will be more complicated than before.

It will take plant breeders and engineers, farmers and processors, transportation and cooperation to feed a hungry world. Technology will drive the future of agriculture and help to curb world hunger. Agriculture may be the sector of our economy where new technology can have the greatest impact in the shortest period of time.

On the 30th anniversary of winning the Nobel Peace Prize, Borlaug said in a speech in Ohio, “The world has the technology – either available or well advanced in the research pipeline – to feed on a sustainable basis a population of 10 billion people.”

Our college has a long history of excellence in developing the next generation of technology to provide food for the world. One area in which we have traditionally been leaders is plant breeding and genomics. Glen Burton, a world-renowned forage breeder in Tifton and a contemporary of Borlaug’s, helped turn our forage and turfgrass breeding program into a world powerhouse.

Today, among our faculty, we have some of the finest plant breeders in the world improving the yield and productivity of everything from soybean and sorghum to peanuts and blueberries. Each understands the consequence of failing to meet the growing demand for food with dwindling resources.

In a recent interview with former US President Jimmy Carter, he reflected on the Carter Center’s work with Borlaug to improve the food supply and farm income in developing nations around the world. They found, especially in Africa, most of their work was with female farmers since the women generally tend the crops. By providing plant varieties better suited to African climates, they were able to put more food on the dinner table and more income in the family budget.

The work these scientists are doing today will ensure that effort continues.

Someone like Norman Borlaug may only come along every 100 years, but our students, our scientists, our engineers, our teachers and our farmers share his drive, determination and curiosity. Those qualities will help usher in the next great revolution in agriculture. The vision for that quest is Borlaug’s lasting legacy to the world.

Sustainable, Local Ag Main Topic of Roundtable

The anecdote about Georgia's double-sided state seal is a favorite of Commissioner of Agriculture Gary W. Black.

It's been a story shared with visitors to his office, with schoolchildren learning where their food comes from, with Rotary and Kiwanis clubs across the state. On Aug. 2, Black shared the story with a room full of Atlanta-area sustainable agriculturalists at the Sustainable Atlanta Roundtable.

Georgia Commissioner of Agriculture Gary W. Black
addresses attendees at the Sustainable Atlanta Roundtable
on Aug. 2.

The side most known by Georgians features an arch and the state motto, but the other side pictures agriculture and commerce.

"It's mentioned in the Code [of Georgia]," he said. "[Agriculture] is still of major, major economic importance and quality of life importance. ... We're interested in it at least three times a day."

Black was joined by moderator Donn Cooper of Georgia Organics, Jenni Harris of White Oak Pastures and Julia Gaskin with the University of Georgia College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, on a panel to discuss pressing issues affecting the state's agriculture industry.

Most importantly, Black said, there's a place for everyone at the table.

"This is the Department of Agriculture for all of agriculture in all of Georgia," he said. "It's not going to be the Department of Agriculture of the past. ... We're building a system we hope you're proud of."

With programs such as Georgia Grown and Feed My School for a Week, food, fiber and associated products grown and produced within state lines are getting more and more attention.

"Your preference is Georgia-grown products. It's about building the pride and understanding the quality of what's produced in Georgia," Black said.

In order to increase the focus on Georgia-grown products, Gaskin called for more "place-based research" applicable to organic and small producers in the Southeast, as well as a way to develop food hubs for small to mid-size farms that produce quantities between commercial growers and farmers markets.

"[Food hubs] typically try to match supply and demand," she said. "If you don't have that attempt to match supply and demand, everybody grows heirloom tomatoes and the market is saturated with heirloom tomatoes, and what happens to the price?"

Questions raised by the audience included concerns about food waste, food sale regulation and the grass-finished beef industry.

Harris said before her family got involved in raising grass-finished cattle, the movement was slow.

"Everyone wanted to talk about it, but nobody really wanted to do it," she said. "I believe -- this is just based on our business -- that the grassfed beef industry is growing and it will be here for a very long time."

Both Harris and Black addressed a question regarding the rising age of the farming community.

"It is a part of our past, but let no one fool you ... it's where the opportunities are in the future," Black said. "We're seeing young people really catch this vision at a greater pace than any time in my lifetime."

From left, Donn Cooper of Georgia Organics, Jenni Harris of
White Oak Pastures, Julia Gaskin of the University of Georgia
and Commissioner Gary W. Black

They said a major hurdle for beginning farmers dealt with was capital -- or rather, the lack thereof -- as well as the cost of on-farm processing to get more local meats on the market.

"We lost our tail for the first two years in not being able to sell enough beef. Now proudly today we're operating at capacity. That's a wonderful thing," Harris said. "It takes a tremendous amount of capital to build a processing plant. ... The government does not say, 'No, you cannot build a processing plant on your farm.' But your banker might say no."

No matter what production method producers choose to use, Black said there's no doubt in his mind the "umbrella is local," and it all goes back to consumers' desire to know where their food comes from.

"The market allows you to choose what you would like to do," he said. "Where the energy and that sustainability in my mind really is, is the whole local nature, and that's why we wanted to kick off Georgia Grown so much. People will respond in the marketplace."