@conference {JRN55423, title = {Virtual fencing of nursing cattle grazing large pastures of Chihuahuan Desert rangelands}, booktitle = {Society for Range Management}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Virtual fencing (VF) is an emerging technology to control livestock dispersal. This technology includes collars that employ auditory-electric pulse cues to deter animals from trespassing into excluded zones. Our objective was to investigate VF application on extensive rangelands. VF-trained nursing Brangus cows were grazed in a 480 ha pasture at the New Mexico State University{\textquoteright}s Chihuahuan Desert Rangeland Research Center with the VF deactivated (control) or activated using three different polygon configurations. The VF-activated polygons excluded cattle from grazing either the East (209ha), West (200ha), or preferred Vegetation PV (80ha) within the pasture. Each pasture deployment lasted a week and the process was repeated on two groups of 11 and 18 cows, respectively. We analyzed 1) foraging behavior differences (control vs. VF-activated); 2) percentage of daily GPS locations within the excluded zones (control vs. VF-activated); and 3) number of auditory-electric pulses emitted during each VF-activated configuration (Excluded blocks East, West, or PV). The data were analyzed via an ANOVA to compare daily-derived variables. Cattle covered larger areas during control vs. VF-activated deployments (134.2 vs. 86.9ha P=0.04) with no differences in distance traveled nor cumulative activity index derived from the in-built motion sensors. When compared to the control, all VF-activated configurations significantly reduced the percentage of GPS positions within the excluded zone (East 52.27 vs. 0.67\%GPS P0<.01; West 18.49 vs. 0.49\%GPS P<0.01; PV 19.90 vs. 3.04\%GPS P<0.01; control vs. VF-activated respectively). Significantly (P<0.01) higher audio and electric pulses (2.09, 0.51 respectively) were emitted during the PV trials compared to East (1.12, 0.17) or West (1.12, 0.14) blocks. In conclusion, VF holds promise in controlling spatial exploration patterns of cattle in extensive rangelands. Polygon configuration requires further research to understand trade-offs between animal welfare and effective management.}, keywords = {cattle grazing, Chihuahuan Desert, large pastures, nursing, rangelands, virtual fencing}, author = {Nyamuryekung{\textquoteright}e, Shelemia and Andrew Cox and Perea, A. and Matthew M. McIntosh and Richard E. Estell and Andr{\'e}s F. Cibils and Holland, J. and Tony Waterhouse and G. Duff and M. Funk and Skye Aney and S. Spiegal and Brandon T Bestelmeyer and S. A. Utsumi} } @proceedings {49920, title = {Tools to study and manage grazing behavior at multiple scales to enhance the sustainability of livestock production systems}, volume = {IX}, year = {2011}, month = {04/2011}, pages = {559-564}, publisher = {International Rangeland Congress}, address = {Rosario, Argentina}, abstract = {

Key points

1. A {\textquotedblleft}single tool{\textquotedblright} for studying free-ranging animal behavior on complex landscapes does not exist.

2. Today{\textquoteright}s tools require competent multiple disciplinary teams beginning with the planning and design of experiments on through to applying the results within a practical management framework.

3. Research that involves instrumenting animals must be conducted in a human manner that accurately measures and or manages the phenomenon in question.

4. Using innate animal behaviors to accomplish management goals by melding biology with electronics to optimize ecological and labor efficiency is the future and virtual fencing will soon be one of the tools.

Introduction: Tracking animals is not new, early hunters practiced it for survival (Liebenberg, 2006); however, today it is practiced in the name of science and what the future holds will be new (Etcgroup., 2004). The phrase {\textquotedblleft}if you can measure it, you can manage it{\textquotedblright} may have first been used in the health care industry (Kinex IHA Corp., 2000). Nevertheless, this axiom is pivotal to range animal ecology involving measuring and managing free-ranging animal distribution, a central tenant of grazing management (Bailey and Brown, 2011). Free-ranging livestock neither use all the space made available to them (Anderson et al., 2003; Rinella et al., 2011) nor do they use it in a random manner (Anderson et al, 2011a). Over 68 factors (Anderson, 2010) including magnetism(Begall et al., 2008) appear to impact landscape use by free-ranging animals. Thus understanding the process of foraging is challenging and may require research programs that de-emphasize traditional methods (Laca, 2009).

}, keywords = {bio-logging, GPS, telemetry, virtual fencing}, url = {/files/bibliography/11-018.pdf}, author = {D.M. Anderson} } @proceedings {50157, title = {Husbandry of free-ranging cows using virtual fencing concepts}, volume = {1}, year = {2008}, month = {June 30 - July 5}, pages = {660}, publisher = {Guangdong People{\textquoteright}s Publishing House}, address = {Hohhot, China}, abstract = {A directional virtual fencing (DVF{\texttrademark}) system approach employing 1 Hz GPS data acquisition and using audio cuing only was successfully used to gather mature free-ranging beef cattle from a 466 ha arid brush infested rangeland paddock into a corral in which drinking water was located . Gathering was conducted during five random morning and five random afternoon times over a two week period not corresponding to when the cattle would normally enter the corral. Their normal time to enter the corral was determined by a one week pre-trial for each group during which time the animal{\textquoteright}s normal time to enter the corral was recorded. The audio cues consisted of a human voice and those sounds coming from an all-terain vehicle (ATV) that had previousl been recorded during one of the manual gathering/training sessions. The treated cattle had previously been habituated to being gathered by a technician riding an ATV and once the cows arrived at the corral they were given a small amont of protein supplement and immediate access to drinking water. In contrast, a similar group of cattle not accustomed to being gathered using this protocol but trained to wear the electronic equipment package as well as eat protein supplement were subjected to autonomous gathering. This study demonstrated the feasability of using electronic equipment together with a food reward in order to autonomously gather free-ranging cows.}, keywords = {free-ranging, GPS, virtual fencing}, author = {D.M. Anderson} } @proceedings {50406, title = {Virtual Fencing - A Concept into Reality}, year = {2006}, month = {June 14-15, 2006}, pages = {61-91}, address = {Rockhampton, Queensland, Australia}, abstract = {Virtual fencing is a method of controlling animals without ground based, natural or man made structures. Control occurs by altering an animal{\textquoteright}s behavior through one or more sensory cues administered to the animal after it has attempted to penetrate an electronically generated 3-dimensional boundary. This boundary can be any geometrical shape, and though unseen by the eye, is detected by an electronic computer system worn by the animal. Autonomous programmable systems use an electronic signal, most commonly from the Global Positioning System (GPS) of satellites that emanate electronic signals in the radio frequency (RF) range. Algorithms within a Geographic Information System (GIS) use these data to determine if a cue should be applied and if so what cue(s), where on the body the cues should be applied and for how long. The first commercial virtual fencing system, patented in 1973 for controlling domestic dogs, was successfully used in 1987 to contain goats in the first experiment to control livestock using virtual fencing. Since then researchers using commercial as well as custom designed systems have successfully demonstrated proof-of-concept that virtual fencing can successfully hold as well as move livestock over the landscape. Commercial virtual livestock control systems do not yet exist; however, research in Australia and the United States continues toward this goal. Pending research needs relating to this method of animal control are discussed in light of currently available technologies.}, keywords = {controlling animals, virtual fencing}, url = {/files/bibliography/06-073Proc.pdf}, author = {D.M. Anderson} } @conference {50422, title = {Animal Control-What constitutes a reliable cue to stop animal movement?}, booktitle = {Society for Range Management 59th Annual Meeting}, year = {2006}, month = {February 12-17, }, address = {Vancouver, British Columbia}, abstract = {Controlling free-ranging livestock requires low-stress cues to alter animal behaviour. Recently modulated sound and electric shock were demonstrated to be effective in controlling free-ranging cattle. In this study the behaviour of 60, 300 kg Belmont Red heifers were observed for behavioural changes when presented cues designed to impede their movement through an alley. The heifers were given an overnight drylot shrink off feed but not drinking water prior to being tested. Individual cattle were allowed to move down a 6.5 m wide alley towards a pen of peers and feed located 71 m from their point of release. Each animal was allowed to move through the alley unimpeded five times to establish a basal behavioural pattern. Animals were then randomly assigned to treatments consisting of sound plus shock, vibration plus shock, a visual cue plus shock, shock by itself and a control. The time each animal required to reach the pen of peers and feed was recorded. If the animal was prevented from reaching the pen of peers and feed by not penetrating through the {\textquoteright}cue barrior{\textquoteright} at set points along the alley for at least 60 sec the test was stopped and the animal was returned to peers located behind the release pen. Cues and shock were manually applied from a laptop while animals were observed from a 3.5 m tower located outside the alley. Electric shock, sound, vibration and Global Position System (GPS) hardware were housed in a neck collar. Results and implications will be discussed.}, keywords = {animal control, animal movement, free-range, virtual fencing}, author = {Bishop-Hurley, G.J. and Swain, D.L. and D.M. Anderson and Peter Corke} } @conference {50530, title = {Understanding Interactions Between Autonomous Animal Control and Temperament When Cattle are Subejcted to Virtual Fencing Applications}, booktitle = {Horizons in Livestock Sciences Conference}, year = {2005}, month = {October 2-5, 200}, pages = {23}, address = {Queensland, Australia}, abstract = {Virtual fencing has the potential to control grazing livestock. Understanding and refining the cues that can alter behavior is an integral part of autonomous animal control. A series of tests have been completed to explore the relationship between temperament and control. Prior to exposure to virtual fencing control the animals were scored for temperament using flight speed and a sociability index using contact logging devices. The behavioural response of 30, Belmont Red steers were observed for behavioural changes when presented with cues prior to receiving an electrical stimulation. A control and four treatments designed to interrupt the animal{\textquoteright}s movement down an alley were tested. The treatments consisted of sound plus electrical stimulation, vibration plus electrical stimulation, a visual cue plus electrical stimulation and electrical stimulation by itself. The treatments were randomly applied to each animal over five consecutive trials. A control treatment in which no cues were applied was used to establish a basal behavioural pattern. A trial was considered completed after each animal had been retained behind the cue barrier for at least 60 sec. All cues and electrical stimulation were manually applied from a laptop located on a portable 3.5 m tower located immediately outside the alley. The electrical stimulation consisted of 1.0 Kv of electricity. Electric stimulation, sound, and vibration along with the Global Position System (GPS) hardware to autonomously record the animal{\textquoteright}s path within the alley were recorded every second.}, keywords = {animal control, controls, temperament, virtual fencing}, author = {D.M. Anderson} } @conference {50619, title = {A moving virtual boundary (VB trademark)}, booktitle = {6th Symposium of the Natural Resources of the Chihuahuan Desert}, year = {2004}, month = {October 15, 2004}, pages = {Abstract p. 16}, address = {Alpine, Texas (Sul Ross State University)}, abstract = {Distributing free-ranging animals across a landscape to facilitate proper forage utilization is universally challenging to range livestock managers. By combining Global Positioning System (GPS) technology, Geographical Information System (GIS) methodology and a practical knowledge of animal behavior, we have developed a methodology for autonomously controlling free-ranging animals. Directional Virtual Fencing (DVF{\texttrademark}) uses programmable sensory cues administered at the proper time and in the correct location on the animal to keep animals within a Virtual Paddock (VP{\texttrademark}) delineated by a Virtual Boundary (VB{\texttrademark}). Using Arc GIS 9 Tracking Analyst software, the geospatial animal data were visually depicted to move within the VP as the north and south VB moved in tandem in time and space across the landscape. Being able to manage grazing pressure using DVF will provide Prescription Stocking (RxS{\texttrademark}) without the challenges wire fencing places on conventional rotational stocking strategies.}, keywords = {DVF, forage utilization, free-ranging animals, GIS, GPS, virtual boundary, virtual fencing}, author = {D.M. Anderson and E.L. Fredrickson and Kris Havstad and B. Nolen and Nayak, P. and C.S. Hale} } @proceedings {50963, title = {Virtual fencing - a prescription range animal management tool for the 21st century}, year = {2001}, month = {March 12-13, 200}, pages = {85-94}, address = {Aberdeen, Scotland}, abstract = {Optimum forage utilization requires herbivores to be moved periodically commensurate with the landscape{\textquoteright}s productivity. Stationary conventional fencing has been tried alone and with other tools and techniques to affect animal distribution and forage utilization; none consistently permit flexible management in real time. Virtual fencing has the potential to automate animal management and provide autonomous animal control. Virtual fencing systems require animals to wear an electronics package that includes hardware, software and an antenna to receive radio frequency (RF) signals. A patented virtual fence device is described that uses RF signals emanating from navigation satellites of the Global Positioning System (GPS). These signals are used to locate the animal{\textquoteright}s geographic location and can be logged at programmable intervals of 1 second or more. They are used to build virtual fences that can be programmed to take any geometrical shape, manipulated in space and time and surround areas as wel as individuals. The unit{\textquoteright}s Geographic Information System (GIS) data continuously compares the animal{\textquoteright}s location and angle of approach to that of the closest virtual fence. Should an animal attempt to penetrate a virtual fence, algorithms within the unit{\textquoteright}s central processing unit determine the suite of programmable cues to apply to the animal{\textquoteright}s left or right side to maximize the animal{\textquoteright}s distance of separation from a virtual fence in the least amount of travel. The cues begin with the least and progresses to the most aversive, depending on the animal{\textquoteright}s proximity to the virtual fence. If the animal fails to respond at the highest level of cuing, the unit shuts down in a failsafe manner to prevent unnecessary stress to the animal.}, keywords = {automate animal management, autonomous animal control, Global Positioning System, radio frequency signals, virtual fencing}, url = {/files/bibliography/01-002.pdf}, author = {D.M. Anderson} }