Virtual herding for flexible livestock management – a review

“…The constant drive towards improved animal efficiency and optimal use of available land and resources can be hindered by vast land areas and limited contact with animals. Perennial advances in technology, combined with an improved understanding of animal behaviour and welfare facilitate the reality of virtual fences as a sustainable fencing solution with potential reductions in labour and physical fencing costs [ 1 ]. Virtual fences are defined as boundaries, enclosures, or barriers without a physical barrier [ 2 ], and may rely on the animal wearing a device.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tech-Savvy Beef Cattle? How Heifers Respond to Moving Virtual Fence Lines

Campbell

Lea

Farrer³

et al. 2017

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…Crossing of the geofence in one direction or multiple directions, triggers a visual, audible, or text alert signal on the handheld device, the location device, or both. Agricultural applications have conventionally used the term virtual fences [ 7 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 ]. The terminology of virtual fences has also been used in studies seeking to promote safety within construction sites, through GNSS tracking of personnel and heavy equipment [ 16 , 17 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy of WAAS-Enabled GPS-RF Warning Signals When Crossing a Terrestrial Geofence

Grayson

Keefe

Tinkham

et al. 2016

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Geofences are virtual boundaries based on geographic coordinates. When combined with global position system (GPS), or more generally global navigation satellite system (GNSS) transmitters, geofences provide a powerful tool for monitoring the location and movements of objects of interest through proximity alarms. However, the accuracy of geofence alarms in GNSS-radio frequency (GNSS-RF) transmitter receiver systems has not been tested. To achieve these goals, a cart with a GNSS-RF locator was run on a straight path in a balanced factorial experiment with three levels of cart speed, three angles of geofence intersection, three receiver distances from the track, and three replicates. Locator speed, receiver distance and geofence intersection angle all affected geofence alarm accuracy in an analysis of variance (p = 0.013, p = 2.58 × 10−8, and p = 0.0006, respectively), as did all treatment interactions (p < 0.0001). Slower locator speed, acute geofence intersection angle, and closest receiver distance were associated with reduced accuracy of geofence alerts.

show abstract

Virtual herding for flexible livestock management – a review

Cited by 53 publications

References 161 publications

Energy and Rangelands: A Perspective

Energy and Rangelands: A Perspective

Tech-Savvy Beef Cattle? How Heifers Respond to Moving Virtual Fence Lines

Accuracy of WAAS-Enabled GPS-RF Warning Signals When Crossing a Terrestrial Geofence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About