Simple SummaryPhysical fences are not always possible, thus automated technology called “virtual fencing” provides a potential solution. Virtual fencing uses Global Positioning System (GPS) technology and animals wear collar devices. As animals approach the virtual fence line, the collar emits an audio tone; if the animals walk further forward, they receive an electrical stimulus. If the animal turns around after the audio tone, they receive no electrical stimulus. However, no studies to date have looked at how animals respond when virtual fences have moved to different paddock locations. Virtual boundaries were set up to restrict six beef cattle wearing collars to different paddock areas. Within a few days, the animals were able to avoid the electrical stimulus by learning to turn away from the fence when they heard the audio tone. Over several weeks, the virtual fence was moved to three different locations within the paddock, and the animals rapidly learned it had moved, turning away at the audio tone the majority of the time. This shows that animals can learn the different collar signals and avoid moving virtual boundaries via the audio tone. The application of virtual fencing to farms enables improved animal management and animal exclusion from environmentally sensitive areas.AbstractGlobal Positioning System (GPS)-based virtual fences offer the potential to improve the management of grazing animals. Prototype collar devices utilising patented virtual fencing algorithms were placed on six Angus heifers in a 6.15 hectare paddock. After a “no fence” period, sequential, shifting virtual fences restricted the animals to 40%, 60%, and 80% of the paddock area widthways and 50% lengthways across 22 days. Audio cues signaled the virtual boundary, and were paired with electrical stimuli if the animals continued forward into the boundary. Within approximately 48 h, the cattle learned the 40% fence and were henceforth restricted to the subsequent inclusion zones a minimum of 96.70% (±standard error 0.01%) of the time. Over time, the animals increasingly stayed within the inclusion zones using audio cues alone, and on average, approached the new fence within 4.25 h. The animals were thus attentive to the audio cue, not the fence location. The time spent standing and lying and the number of steps were similar between inclusion zones (all p ≥ 0.42). More lying bouts occurred at the 80% and lengthways inclusion zones relative to “no fence” (p = 0.04). Further research should test different cattle groups in variable paddock settings and measure physiological welfare responses to the virtual fencing stimuli.

No abstract

Simple SummaryCattle can help to graze riparian zones when managed effectively. Virtual fencing technology, where cattle wear collar devices that provide audio followed by electrical signals around a GPS-based fence, could be used in areas that are difficult to physically fence. An early experimental automated collar device prototype was tested in excluding 10 cattle from a riparian zone in Australia. Animals were given free access to an 11.33-hectare area for three weeks, excluded from river access by a virtual fence for ten days (2.86-hectare inclusion zone), followed by free access again for six days. Animals were almost exclusively contained by the virtual fence. All animals approached the virtual fence over the trial duration and received both audio cues and electrical stimuli, but individual animals differed in how often they tested the virtual boundary. Over time, animals learned to respond to the audio cue alone to avoid receiving an electrical stimulus. Following fence deactivation all animals re-entered the previously excluded area. Further research with more groups and longer periods of exclusion using updated collar devices would determine the scope of virtual fencing technology for cattle grazing control.AbstractGrazing cattle can both negatively and positively impact riparian zones, dependent on controlled grazing management. Virtual fencing technology, using collar devices that operate via GPS can provide audio cues and electrical stimuli to temporarily exclude cattle from specified areas as desired. An early experimental prototype automated virtual fencing system was tested in excluding ten cattle from a riparian zone in Australia. Animals were given free access to an 11.33-hectare area for three weeks, excluded from river access by a virtual fence for ten days (2.86-hectare inclusion zone), followed by free access again for six days. Animals were almost exclusively contained by the virtual fence. All animals received audio cues and electrical stimuli with daily fence interactions, but there was high individual variation with some animals first approaching the fence more often than others. Overall, there was an approximately 25% probability that animals would receive an electrical stimulus following an audio cue. Individual associative learning may have been socially-facilitated by the group’s behaviour. Following fence deactivation, all animals re-entered the previously excluded area. Further research with more groups and longer periods of exclusion using updated collar devices would determine the scope of virtual fencing technology for cattle grazing control.