The evolution of virtual fences: A review

Umstätter, Christina

doi:10.1016/j.compag.2010.10.005

Cited by 133 publications

(98 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Bij ongewenst gebruik van de stalruimte kan dat mogelijk worden geweten aan ontwerpfouten. Lang geleden is door Brantas (1968) al een Een aantal onderzoeken is gericht op het sturen van dieren door middel van virtual fences (BishopHurley et al, 2007;Lee et al, 2009;Lee et al, 2007;Umstatter, 2011). Van belang is dat dier snapt wat het gewenste gedrag is, ofwel wat het zou moeten doen om een negatieve prikkel te ontlopen (associative learning) (Lee et al, 2007;Umstatter, 2011).…”

Section: Sturen Van Uitscheidingsgedrag Van Runderenunclassified

Scheiding van urine en feces bij melkvee: fysiologie, gedragsherkenning en techniek

Verdoes

Bokma

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Sturen Van Uitscheidingsgedrag Van Runderenunclassified

Scheiding van urine en feces bij melkvee: fysiologie, gedragsherkenning en techniek

Verdoes

Bokma

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…4 Traditionally, physical barriers and fences are used to control animal movement within a farm's geographical limits. A virtual fence system aims to accomplish such control without using physical barriers.…”

Section: Automationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Precision Farming: Sensor Analytics

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…When virtual fencing (Anderson, 2007;Umstatter, 2011) becomes a commercial reality, controlling cattle movements will simultaneously control bonded small ruminant movement. However, if human or livestock health or safety issues cannot be breached, then controlling livestock with virtual fencing is not an option as this means of animal control is based on modifying animal behavior without physical barriers.…”

Section: How To Form a Flerdmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing livestock using animal behavior: mixed-species stocking and flerds

Anderson

Fredrickson

Estell

2012

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mixed-species stocking can foster sound landscape management while offering economic and ecological advantages compared with mono-species stocking. Producers contemplating a mixed-species enterprise should reflect on several considerations before implementing this animal management strategy. Factors applicable to a particular producer's landscape must be considered together with goals and economic constraints before implementing mixed-species stocking. A major consideration when using mixed-species stocking is how to deal with predation losses, especially among small ruminants. An approach being adopted in some commercial operations capitalizes on using innate animal behaviors to form cohesive groups of two or more livestock species that consistently remain together under free-ranging conditions. These groups are referred to as flerds. The mixing of a flock of sheep and/or goats with a herd of cattle into a flerd has been shown to protect sheep and goats from coyote predation, as well as offering other husbandry advantages. Some of the added advantages include more efficient conversion of forage into animal protein. Creation of flerds, their maintenance and advantages are discussed.Keywords: livestock, bonding, predation, animal behavior ImplicationsThe simultaneous stocking of cattle, sheep and/or goats, especially on landscapes having a heterogeneous mixture of plant species, have positive ecological and economic advantages compared with mono-species stocking. However, predation of small ruminants, especially from canines, can inflict major economic losses, thus eliminating the benefits of mixed-species stocking. Modifying small ruminant behavior so that they consistently remain in the presence of cattle can reduce or eliminate death losses of small ruminants while providing other husbandry advantages. Bonding small ruminants to cattle to form flerds is an option worth considering in lieu of traditionally managed flocks and herds. The objective of this manuscript was to briefly review some of the background of mixed-species stocking with a focus on the benefits of using animal behavior to manage mixedspecies livestock groups, especially where fulltime herders are not used. IntroductionDifferent herbivore species have foraged together since herbivory began. Foraging is a spatial-temporal animal process composed of a series of sequential bites among forage plants (Laca, 2009). The sum of these bites impact the landscape either positively or negatively and also the health and well-being of the foraging animal. Among the most studied mixed-species natural ecosystems is the SerengetiMara Plain of Africa (Sinclair and Norton-Griffiths, 1979;McNaughton, 1985;Sinclair and Arcese, 1995;Sinclair et al., 2008). The concept of using mixed-species stocking dates from antiquity (Galaty and Johnson, 1990), frequently in a 'leader'-'follower' relationship that can reduce parasitism (Rocha et al., 2008) and may improve individual animal performance (Nolan and Connolly, 1976;Dickson et al., 1981;Odadi et al., 2011) and improve ...

show abstract

The evolution of virtual fences: A review

Cited by 133 publications

References 24 publications

Scheiding van urine en feces bij melkvee: fysiologie, gedragsherkenning en techniek

Scheiding van urine en feces bij melkvee: fysiologie, gedragsherkenning en techniek

Precision Farming: Sensor Analytics

Managing livestock using animal behavior: mixed-species stocking and flerds

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About