Virtual Fence Responses Are Socially Facilitated in Beef Cattle

The effectiveness of a virtual fencing technology to allocate pasture and herd cows to the milking shed

Virtual fencing technology provides an opportunity to rethink the management of intensive grazing systems in general, yet most studies have used products developed and applied to more extensive livestock systems. This research aimed to assess the application of a virtual fencing technology developed for the intensive pastoral dairy industry. The Halter system uses 2 primary cues (sound and vibration) and one aversive secondary cue (a low-energy electrical pulse) to confine cows to a pasture allocation and remotely herd cows. We studied 2 groups of 40 mid-lactation multiparous dairy cows (Bos taurus, predominantly Friesian and Friesian × Jersey, parity 1-8). Cows were milked twice per day and provided 9 kg of pasture DM/d in a 24-h allocation, supplemented with 7 kg of silage and 6 kg of grain DM/d. Training to the Halter system occurred over 10 d, after which cows were managed with the technology for a further 28 d. The type and time of cues delivered were recorded by each collar and communicated via a base station to cloud data storage. Cows took less than a day to start responding to the sound cues delivered while held on a pasture allocation and were moving to the milking parlor without human intervention by d 4 of training. On training d 1, at least 60% of sound cues resulted in an electrical pulse. Across training d 2 to 10, 6.4% of sound cues resulted in a pulse. After the 10-d training period, 2.6% of sound cues resulted in a pulse. During the management period, 90% of cows spent ≤1.7 min/d beyond the virtual fence, received ≤0.71 pulses/d in the paddock and received ≤1 pulse/d during virtual herding to the parlor. By the final week of the management period, 50% of cows received 0 pulses/week in the paddock and 35% received 0 pulses/week during virtual herding. The number of pulses delivered per day and the pulse/sound cue ratio was lower in this study than that previously reported using other virtual fencing technologies. We conclude that the Halter technology is successful at containing lactating dairy cows in an intensive grazing system as well as at remotely herding animals to the milking parlor.

Effects of Social Facilitation and Introduction Methods for Cattle on Virtual Fence Adaptation

Agricultural industries rely on physical fences to manage livestock. However, these present practical, financial, and ecological challenges, which may be solved using virtual fencing. This study aimed to identify how experienced cattle through social facilitation and the introduction method influence inexperienced cattle. Based on three stocks held in Fanø, Denmark, containing 12, 17 and 13 Angus (Bos taurus), we examined the virtual fence learning in three case studies using one gradual introduction with zero experienced cattle (A) and two different instant introductions with one (B) and ten (C) experienced cattle. Gradual introduction had the virtual fence moved 20 m every other day for eleven days, and in the two instant introductions, the physical fence was removed in one day. Warnings and impulses were recorded during an 11-day learning period and a 26-day post-learning period, using the impulses per warning to quantify if the cattle adapted. Case studies A and B showed a significant reduction in the warnings and impulses, but only A showed a significant reduction in the impulses per warning when comparing the learning period to the post-learning period. Due to the non-standardised experiments, it was not possible to conclude if the number of experienced cattle or the introduction method had an effect on the results.

Stress indicators in dairy cows adapting to virtual fencing

Virtual fencing (VF) enables livestock grazing without physical fences by conditioning animals to a virtual boundary delimited with an audio tone (AT) and an electric pulse (EP). The present study followed the adaptation process of lactating dairy cows to a VF system with changing virtual boundaries and investigated its impact on animal welfare. Twenty cows were divided into stratified groups (2× VF; 2× electric fencing, EF) of five individuals. Each group grazed half-days in a separate EF paddock of comparable size during 3 d of acclimation (P0), followed by 21, 14, 14, and 7 d of experimental treatment (P1 to P4). At the start of the trial, all cows were equipped with an IceQube pedometer (Peacock Technology Ltd, Stirling, UK) and a VF collar (Nofence AS, Batnfjordsøra, Norway). During P0, cows were accustomed to their first paddock with a deactivated virtual boundary and wearing the sensors. In P1 to P4, an active virtual boundary for the VF groups, and a second EF for the EF groups was set up parallel to an outer EF within their paddock. Throughout the trial, the sensors continuously tracked cow positions and activity behavior at 15-min intervals. From P1 onwards, the VF collars additionally recorded each AT and EP per cow with a georeferenced time stamp. During P0 to P4, daily feed intake, body weight, and milk yield were recorded in the barn. A total of 26 milk samples were collected per cow to determine milk cortisol levels. Behavioral observations were conducted for 2 h on day 23 to record agonistic behaviors, vocalizations, and excretions. The total number of stimuli per cow ranged from 37 to 225 ATs (mean ± SD: 1.9 ± 3.3 per day) and 3 to 11 EPs (mean ± SD: 0.1 ± 0.7 per day) throughout the trial. The maximum number of EPs per day was 8 for an individual cow and occurred once on D1. Mean EP/AT decreased by 55% during the first three half-days of grazing and with each paddock change from 0.2 EP/AT in week 1 to 0.03, 0.02, and 0 EP/AT in weeks 4, 6, and 8, respectively. Linear and generalized mixed effects models revealed that milk yield and cortisol, feed intake, body weight, and activity and lying behavior did not significantly differ between VF and EF groups. A higher number of agonistic behaviors were observed in the VF groups when the VF system was activated. However, due to the short observation periods only few contacts were observed in total. Overall, all cows adapted to the VF system without evidence of lasting adverse effects on animal welfare.

A matter of age? How age affects the adaptation of lactating dairy cows to virtual fencing

Virtual Fencing (VF) can be a helpful technology in managing herds in pasture-based systems. In VF systems, animals wear a VF collar using global positioning, and physical boundaries are replaced by virtual ones. The Nofence (Nofence AS, Batnfjordsøra, Norway) collars used in this study emit an acoustic warning when an animal approaches the virtual boundaries, followed by an aversive electrical pulse if the animal does not return to the defined area. The stimuli sequence is repeated up to three times if the animal continues to walk forward. Although it has been demonstrated that animals successfully learn to adapt to the system, it is unknown if this adaptation changes with animal age and thus has consequences for VF training and animal welfare. This study compared the ability of younger and older dairy cows to adapt to a VF system and whether age affected activity behavior, milk yield, and animal long-term stress under VF management. The study was conducted on four comparable strip-grazing paddocks. Twenty lactating Holstein-Friesian cows, divided into four groups of five animals each, were equipped with VF collars and pedometers. Groups differed in age: two groups of older cows (>4 lactations) and two groups of younger ones (first lactation). After a 7-d training, paddock sizes were increased by successively moving the virtual fence during four consecutive grazing periods. Throughout the study, the pedometers recorded daily step count, time spent standing, and time spent lying. For the determination of long-term stress, hair samples were collected on the first and last day of the trial and the hair cortisol content was assessed. Data were analyzed by generalized mixed-effect models. Overall, age had no significant impact on animal responses to VF, but there were interaction effects of time: the number of acoustic warnings in the last period was higher in younger cows (P < 0.001), and the duration of acoustic warnings at training was shorter for older cows (P < 0.01). Moreover, younger cows walked more per day during the training (P < 0.01). Finally, no effects on milk yield or hair cortisol content were detected. In conclusion, all cows, regardless of age, adapted rapidly to the VF system without compromising their welfare according to the indicators measured.

How do grazing beef and dairy cattle respond to virtual fences? A review

Virtual fencing (VF) is a modern fencing technology that requires the animal to wear a device (e.g., a collar) that emits acoustic signals to replace the visual cue of traditional physical fences (PF) and, if necessary, mild electric signals. The use of devices that provide electric signals leads to concerns regarding the welfare of virtually fenced animals. The objective of this review is to give an overview of the current state of VF research into the welfare and learning behavior of cattle. Therefore, a systematic literature search was conducted using two online databases and reference lists of relevant articles. Studies included were peer-reviewed and written in English, used beef or dairy cattle, and tested neck-mounted VF devices. Further inclusion criteria were a combination of audio and electrical signals and a setup as a pasture trial, which implied that animals grazed in groups on grassland for 4 h minimum while at least one fence side was virtually fenced. The eligible studies (n = 13) were assigned to one or two of the following categories: animal welfare (n studies = 8) or learning behavior (n studies = 9). As data availability for conducting a meta-analysis was not sufficient, a comparison of the means of welfare indicators (daily weight gain, daily lying time, steps per hour, daily number of lying bouts, and fecal cortisol metabolites [FCM]) for virtually and physically fenced animals was done instead. In an additional qualitative approach, the results from the welfare-related studies were assembled and discussed. For the learning behavior, the number of acoustic and electric signals and their ratio were used in a linear regression model with duration in days as a numeric predictor to assess the learning trends over time. There were no significant differences between VF and PF for most welfare indicators (except FCM with lower values for VF; P = 0.0165). The duration in days did not have a significant effect on the number of acoustic and electric signals. However, a significant effect of trial duration on the ratio of electric-to-acoustic signals (P = 0.0014) could be detected, resulting in a decreasing trend of the ratio over time, which suggests successful learning. Overall, we conclude that the VF research done so far is promising but is not yet sufficient to ensure that the technology could not have impacts on the welfare of certain cattle types. More research is necessary to investigate especially possible long-term effects of VF.

Behavioral Adaptations of Nursing Brangus Cows to Virtual Fencing: Insights from a Training Deployment Phase

Virtual fencing systems have emerged as a promising technology for managing the distribution of livestock in extensive grazing environments. This study provides comprehensive documentation of the learning process involving two conditional behavioral mechanisms and the documentation of efficient, effective, and safe animal training for virtual fence applications on nursing Brangus cows. Two hypotheses were examined: (1) animals would learn to avoid restricted zones by increasing their use of containment zones within a virtual fence polygon, and (2) animals would progressively receive fewer audio-electric cues over time and increasingly rely on auditory cues for behavioral modification. Data from GPS coordinates, behavioral metrics derived from the collar data, and cueing events were analyzed to evaluate these hypotheses. The results supported hypothesis 1, revealing that virtual fence activation significantly increased the time spent in containment zones and reduced time in restricted zones compared to when the virtual fence was deactivated. Concurrently, behavioral metrics mirrored these findings, with cows adjusting their daily travel distances, exploration area, and cumulative activity counts in response to the allocation of areas with different virtual fence configurations. Hypothesis 2 was also supported by the results, with a decrease in cueing events over time and increased reliance with animals on audio cueing to avert receiving the mild electric pulse. These outcomes underscore the rapid learning capabilities of groups of nursing cows in responding to virtual fence boundaries.

Stakeholder Challenges and Opportunities of GPS Shock Collars to Achieve Optimum Welfare in a Conservation or Farm Setting

Virtual fences for livestock facilitated by a GPS shock collar (GPS-SC) and phone app were introduced to the UK in cattle herd trials in 2020. Technology which uses aversive shocks to control livestock movement on farms and in other settings poses a significant risk to livestock welfare. There are currently no welfare protocols in place in the UK to ensure the ethical use of GPS-SCs. The objective of this study was to understand how GPS-SCs were being used in practice in the UK and gather data to assist researchers and policymakers in the future research and development of a welfare protocol for the UK. We studied how the technology performs in terms of welfare challenges and opportunities, covering extensive livestock production, conservation settings, "rewilding", and regenerative farming practices, where the technology is currently being applied. Semistructured interviews were conducted with key stakeholders. In-depth interviews (n = 8) supported the previous literature that the use of GPS-SCs in restricted grazing settings poses a risk to animal welfare. This is due to the wavering virtual fence boundary line (which is affected by satellite movements), a lack of visual markers, and, in some "rewilding" and conservation settings, livestock keepers, which require training and support to enable optimal welfare in practice and prevent misuse of the technology. Results also indicated that there are opportunities for enhancing livestock welfare with GPS-SCs in very extensive farm settings, where targeted care can be facilitated by using the data to monitor and track livestock using GPS-SCs, and which can also prevent cattle injury or fatality through virtual pastures designed to protect livestock from hazards such as roads or bogs. Future research is needed to focus on minimising shocks in the training period and to better understand the value of visual electric fences in the training process.

Current and Future Approaches to Mitigate Conflict between Humans and Asian Elephants: The Potential Use of Aversive Geofencing Devices

Asian elephants are a principal cause of human-wildlife conflict. This results in the death/injury of elephants and humans and large-scale crop and property damage. Most current human-elephant conflict (HEC) mitigation tools lack the flexibility to accommodate the ecological needs of elephants and are ineffective at reducing HEC in the long-term. Here we review common HEC mitigation tools used in Asia and the potential of Aversive Geofencing Devices (AGDs) to manage problem elephants. AGDs can be configured to monitor animal movements in real-time and deliver auditory warnings followed by electric stimuli whenever animals attempt to move across user-specified virtual boundaries. Thus, AGDs are expected to condition elephants to avoid receiving shocks and keep them away from virtually fenced areas, while providing alternative routes that can be modified if required. Studies conducted using AGDs with other species provide an overview of their potential in conditioning wild animals. We recommend that the efficacy and welfare impact of AGDs be evaluated using captive elephants along with public perception of using AGDs on elephants as a means of addressing the inherent deficiencies of common HEC mitigation tools. If elephants could be successfully conditioned to avoid virtual fences, then AGDs could resolve many HEC incidents throughout Asia.

Dairy cows did not rely on social learning mechanisms when solving a spatial detour task

As herd-living animals, cattle have opportunities to observe and learn from others. While there is evidence of simpler processes of information transfer in cattle (social facilitation and stimulus enhancement), true social learning mechanisms in cattle remain largely unexplored. This study aimed to investigate if dairy cows possess cognitive abilities to acquire new behavior through social learning in a spatial detour task. Thirty-two dairy cows (ages 2–9 years) participated in the study. A food reward was placed behind a U-shaped formation (4 x 2 m), allowing the cows to see but not reach the reward without first detouring around the obstacle. The U-shape provided two routes (~18 m walking distance) to the reward, of which one was used for demonstration. Two cows were demonstrators and 30 cows were divided into two groups, assigned as either observers of demonstration (n = 15) or controls not observing demonstration (n = 15). Cows had three attempts (trials) to solve the task. Response variables were: success, latency to reach the reward, concordance in choice of route to detour, and time spent facing the test arena before each trial started. The study found no significant differences in success or latency between observers and controls, although observers spent a greater proportion of the time before trials facing the test arena. However, successful observers tended to be faster than successful controls. Individual cows were generally consistent in their choice of route, and cows choosing the demonstrated route were significantly faster than cows that did not. Success in solving the task decreased over trials, likely due to decreasing food motivation. Age had a significant effect on success in 2^nd and 3^rd trial, with younger cows being more successful. The lacking effect of treatment on success suggests that the age effect may be explained by a higher motivation, rather than social learning. Adding to the sparse knowledge of social learning in farm animals, these results indicate that cows did not utilize social learning mechanisms when solving the detour task. Future research should focus on clarifying whether cattle possess cognitive abilities necessary for social learning, as well as if /when social learning is a primary strategy.

Heifers don't care: no evidence of negative impact on animal welfare of growing heifers when using virtual fences compared to physical fences for grazing

Virtual fencing (VF) represents a way to simplify traditional pasture management with its high labour and cost requirements for fencing and to make better use of the 'beneficial' agronomic and ecological effects of livestock grazing. In this study, the VF technology (® Nofence, AS, Batnfjordsøra Norway) was used with Fleckvieh heifers to investigate possible welfare impacts on the animals compared to conventionally fenced animals when they were trained to respond correctly to the system. The Nofence® collars (attached to the neck of the heifers) send acoustic signals as a warning when the animals approach the VF line, which was set up by GPS coordinates within the Nofence®-App, followed by an electric pulse when they do not stop or return. The heifers had no experience with VF prior to the study. Two treatments (VF versus physical fencing (PF)) were applied to six groups of four heifers each (three groups per treatment) over three 12-day time replicates. One VF line separated the pasture of the VF group into an accessible or non-accessible area. The control group had a PF line. Both groups were equipped with Nofence® collars (deactivated for the PF group). The trial took place on two adjacent paddocks of 1 000 m² each following a 12-day schedule which was divided into three sections: visual support of the VF line by a physical barrier (first 2 days), only virtual border without visual support, moving the VF line (on day 8). Each time replicate followed the next successively on different paddocks with two new groups of heifers, which were grazed 5 h daily. During the whole experiment, the behaviour of each of the four animals per group was continuously observed; 2 h a.m., 2 h p.m. Exclusion by the VF line was effective in our trial. None of the heifers crossed the virtual boundary, i.e. the time spent in exclusion zone was zero. The heifers received 2.70 ± 2.63 acoustic signals and 0.30 ± 0.36 electric pulses (mean ± SD) per heifer and hour during all time replicates. Main cattle behaviour on pasture was not affected by the fencing system. Live weight gain, herbage consumption and faecal cortisol metabolites also revealed no significant differences. The duration until the heifers restarted grazing after an electric pulse from the Nofence® collar was significantly shorter than after an electric pulse from the physical fence. We can summarise that in our study, cattle well-being on pasture was not negatively affected by VF compared to PF.

Is Virtual Fencing an Effective Way of Enclosing Cattle? Personality, Herd Behaviour and Welfare

In modern nature conservation and rewilding there is a need for controlling the movements of large grazers in extensively managed areas. The inflexibility of physical fencing can be a limitation in nature management, and the physical boundaries created by physical fencing can have detrimental effects on wildlife. Virtual fencing systems provide boundaries without physical structures. These systems utilise collars with GPS technology to track animals and deliver auditory or electric cues to encourage the animals to stay within the predefined boundaries. This study aims to assess the use of virtual fencing (Nofence©) to keep twelve Angus cows (Bos taurus) within a virtual enclosure without compromising their welfare. As such, the study examines inter-individual differences between the cows as well as their herd behaviour, when reacting and learning to respond appropriately to virtual fencing. Moreover, the activity of the cows was used as an indicator of welfare. The virtual fencing was successful in keeping the herd within the designated area. Moreover, the cattle learned to avoid the virtual border and respond to auditory cues, where the cows received significantly more auditory warning and electric impulses per week throughout the first 14 days than the remaining 125 days (p < 0.001). The cows were found to express both inter-individual differences (p < 0.001) and herd behaviour. The cattle did not express any significant changes in their activity upon receiving an electrical impulse from the collar. Thus, indicating that there were little to no acute welfare implications associated with the use of virtual fencing in this study. This study clearly supports the potential for virtual fencing as a viable alternative to physical electric fencing. However, it also shows that both individual differences in personality and herd structure should be considered when selecting individuals for virtual fencing.

The Effect of a Restricted Feed Ration on Dairy Cow Response to Containment From Feed Using a Virtual Fence

Dairy cattle are offered varying amounts of feed which they deplete through time. A reduction in the amount of feed allocated to cows may impact on their containment using a virtual fence (VF). Pre-commercial neckbands (eShepherd®, Agersens, Melbourne, VIC) deliver an audio tone (AT) to the individual cow when it reaches the VF, and this is followed by an electrical pulse (EP) if they continue forward movement. No further stimuli are delivered if the cow stops or turns around. Thirty-four non-lactating dairy cows were used across three blocks in a controlled field experiment evaluating the impact of feed restriction on the exclusion of cows from a lucerne cube feed source using a VF. Within each block cows were pre-trained to the VF system for 6-days on pasture before being fed either a (1) Restricted (R, 12 ± 0.3 kg) or (2) Above maintenance (+M, 20 kg) lucerne cube ration each day. The treatment groups were then tested for four 30 min tests (T1–T4) in test paddocks of 100 × 20 m. For testing, a VF was set at 30 m from the paddock entry and 2 kg per cow of lucerne cube feed was placed at 90 m. Only R cows crossed the VF to access the feed, thereby receiving more AT and EP stimuli in T1 and T2 as compared to +M cows (P ≤ 0.03). However, there was no difference between treatments in T3 and T4 as cows learned the test routine and to remain within the VF in the paddock context. These results suggest that feed restriction may impact the exclusion of dairy cows from feed using a VF, but this effect is limited, and cows can learn to remain within a VF even when fed a restricted ration.

A Case Study on the Use of Virtual Fencing to Intensively Graze Angus Heifers Using Moving Front and Back-Fences

Virtual fencing contains and controls grazing cattle using sensory cues rather than physical fences. The technology comprises a neckband-mounted device that delivers an audio cue when the animal nears a virtual boundary that has been set via global positioning system, followed by an electrical stimulus if it walks beyond the boundary. Virtual fencing has successfully been used to intensively graze cattle using a simple virtual front-fence, but a more complex intensive grazing system comprising moving virtual front and back-fences has not been assessed. We studied the effectiveness of virtual fencing technology to contain groups of Angus heifers within grazing cells defined by semi-permanent electric side-fences and virtual front and back-fences, compared to groups of heifers contained in cells defined only by electric fencing. Four groups of 10 Angus heifers were randomly allocated to a “control” (grazed with a conventional electric front and back-fence, n = 2 groups) or “virtual fence” treatment (grazed with a virtual front and back-fence, n = 2 groups). The groups of heifers grazed four adjacent experimental paddocks that were established using TechnoGrazing™ infrastructure. An estimated 9.5 kg pasture DM/heifer.day was offered in each of three 3 day allocations (9 day study period). Data collected include cues delivered by the neckbands, time beyond the virtual boundaries, pasture consumption for each allocation and heifer live weight changes over the study period. The virtual front and back-fences successfully contained one group of heifers in their grazing cell, but the second group of heifers spent an increasing amount of time in the exclusion zone during the second and third allocations and consequently received an increasing number of audio and electrical stimuli. There were no effects of electric or virtual-fence treatment on live weight change or pasture utilization. By grazing heifers in adjacent paddocks our experimental design may have produced a motivation for some heifers to cross the virtual boundary to regain close contact with familiar conspecifics. Despite this, valuable learnings were gained from this study. Most notably, virtual fencing should not be used to manage cattle that have close visual contact to other mobs. We conclude that the successful application of virtual fencing technology needs to accommodate the natural behaviors of cattle.

Opportunities to Apply Precision Livestock Management on Rangelands

Precision livestock management has become a new field of study as the result of recent advancements in real-time global positioning system (GPS) tracking, accelerometer and other sensor technologies. Real-time tracking and accelerometer monitoring has the potential to remotely detect livestock disease, animal well-being and grazing distribution issues and notify ranchers and graziers so that they can respond as soon as possible. On-going research has shown that accelerometers can remotely monitor livestock behavior and detect activity changes that are associated with disease and parturition. GPS tracking can also detect parturition by monitoring the distance between a ewe and the remainder of the flock. Tracking also has the potential to detect water system failures. Combinations of GPS tracking and accelerometer monitoring may be more accurate than either device used by itself. Real-time GPS tracking can identify when livestock congregate in environmental sensitive areas which may allow managers the chance to respond before resource degradation occurs. Identification of genetic markers associated with terrain use, decreased cost of GPS tracking and novel tracking data processing should facilitate development of tools needed for genetic selection for cattle grazing distribution. Precision livestock management has potential to improve welfare of livestock grazing rangelands and forested lands, reduce labor costs and improve ranch profitability and improve the condition and sustainability of riparian areas and other environmental sensitive areas on grazing lands around the world.

A Multi-Disciplinary Approach to Assess the Welfare Impacts of a New Virtual Fencing Technology

Virtual fencing involving the application of audio cues and electrical stimuli is being commercially developed for cattle. Virtual fencing has the potential to improve productivity through optimized pasture management and utilization by grazing animals. The application of virtual fencing initiates public concern for the potential welfare impacts on animals due the aversive nature of using an electrical stimulus. It is therefore important to provide welfare assurance of the impacts of virtual fencing on livestock. In this paper, we provide an overview of the welfare assessment and validation stages for virtual fencing which could be applied to other new technologies utilizing novel systems. An understanding of stress measures and their suitability for use in specific contexts is discussed, including the use of glucocorticoids to measure both acute and chronic stress, and behavioral responses and patterns to indicate welfare states. The importance of individual differences in relation to learning and cognition are also highlighted. Together, this multi-disciplinary approach to welfare assessment provides a tool kit that may be applied for welfare assurance of some new technologies and systems for farm animals.

Validation of Real-Time Kinematic (RTK) Devices on Sheep to Detect Grazing Movement Leaders and Social Networks in Merino Ewes

Understanding social behaviour in livestock groups requires accurate geo-spatial localisation data over time which is difficult to obtain in the field. Automated on-animal devices may provide a solution. This study introduced an Real-Time-Kinematic Global Navigation Satellite System (RTK-GNSS) localisation device (RTK rover) based on an RTK module manufactured by the company u-blox (Thalwil, Switzerland) that was assembled in a box and harnessed to sheep backs. Testing with 7 sheep across 4 days confirmed RTK rover tracking of sheep movement continuously with accuracy of approximately 20 cm. Individual sheep geo-spatial data were used to observe the sheep that first moved during a grazing period (movement leaders) in the one-hectare test paddock as well as construct social networks. Analysis of the optimum location update rate, with a threshold distance of 20 cm or 30 cm, showed that location sampling at a rate of 1 sample per second for 1 min followed by no samples for 4 min or 9 min, detected social networks as accurately as continuous location measurements at 1 sample every 5 s. The RTK rover acquired precise data on social networks in one sheep flock in an outdoor field environment with sampling strategies identified to extend battery life.

The application of virtual fencing technology effectively herds cattle and sheep

Context Herding and mustering procedures during livestock management can be time-consuming, labour intensive, and costly. The ability to gather animals virtually is an enticing notion but technology to do this is not widely commercially available. Aims The eShepherd® virtual fencing system being developed for cattle may be able to remotely herd animals. This system operates via global positioning system, and requires animals to wear a neckband device. Animals are trained to associate an audio tone with an electrical pulse to avoid a virtual boundary. Methods Experiments were conducted with cattle using pre-commercial prototypes of the automated virtual fencing neckbands, and with sheep using manually operated dog training collars implementing the same virtual fencing algorithm to explore the potential of this technology for herding, and optimal fence designs for herding success. In the first experiment, five groups of 12 cattle were moved down a 344 m paddock using three different fence placement designs. Results The most successful design for cattle herding was a back fence that followed behind the animals to prevent them from turning back in the wrong direction. The fences were manually activated by personnel based on the cattle movement. The same type of fence design was manually applied to two groups of six sheep to successfully herd them down a 140 m paddock in the second experiment. Conclusions All herding was highly dependent on the animal’s own pace of movement as no signals were applied to ‘push’ the animals, the systems only prevented movement back in the wrong direction. The pre-commercial prototype of the automated eShepherd® device used is now obsolete and testing with updated versions would be needed to confirm its application for animal herding. Implications These preliminary trials indicate potential for virtual fencing technology to herd livestock, but technology improvements are required, and an automated device for sheep is not yet available.

Social influence on the effectiveness of virtual fencing in sheep

Early virtual fencing trials have effectively contained small groups of sheep within set areas of a paddock when all animals were wearing manual electronic collars. With sheep farming commonly involving large flocks, a potential cost-effective application of virtual fencing would involve applying equipment to only a proportion of the flock. In this study, we tested the ability of virtual fencing to control a small flock of sheep with differing proportions of the group exposed to the virtual fence (VF). Thirty-six Merino sheep were identified as leaders, middle or followers by moving them through a laneway. The sheep were then allocated to groups balanced for order of movement. The groups (n = 9 per group) included applying the VF to the following proportions of animals within each group: (1) 100% (n = 9 VF) (2) 66% (n = 6 VF; n = 3 no VF) (3) 33% (n = 3 VF; n = 6 no VF) (4) 0% (no VF; free to roam the paddock). The groups were given access to their own paddock (80 × 20 m) for two consecutive days, six hours per day, with the VF groups prevented from entering an exclusion zone that covered 50% of the north side of the paddock. During these hours, VF interactions, behavioural time budgets, and body temperature were recorded as measures of stress, and location was tracked with GPS. Group 100% VF and Control were tested on the first two days and groups 33% VF and 66% VF were tested on the following two days. During VF implementation the 100% VF and 66% VF group were successfully prevented from entering the exclusion zone. Having only 33% of the flock exposed to the virtual fence was not successful, with the sheep pushing forward through the VF to join flock mates in the exclusion zone. For learning to respond to the audio cue, sheep in the 33% group received more electrical stimuli with a 0.51 proportion for the ratio of electrical stimuli to audio cue, compared to 0.22 and 0.28 for the 100% and 66% groups, respectively. There were small differences in behavioural patterns of standing and lying on both days of testing, with the 100% VF and 66% VF groups spending more time lying. Although stress-induced hyperthermia did not occur in any of the VF groups, body temperature differed in the 33% VF group. There were no differences in temperature measures between the control and 100% VF animals. This study demonstrates that for a short period, controlling two-thirds of the flock was equally as effective as virtually fencing all animals, while controlling one-third of a flock with a virtual fence was not effective. For the short term, it appears that implementing the VF to a proportion of the flock can be an effective method of containment. Due to the limitations of this study, these results warrant further testing with larger flocks and for longer periods.