Mention the term virtual fencing (VF) and you are likely to be inundated with questions. Is it something from the latest video game? Is it used to manage livestock in space? Does it mean we can remove all fences from the landscape? 

Virtual fencing is an up-and-coming technology designed to reduce labor for livestock producers, enhance rangeland health, and potentially reduce the number of fences crisscrossing the private and public grazing lands around the world.  

Most people have seen virtual, or invisible, fences for dogs where the canine wears a collar that talks to a buried cable surrounding the perimeter of the yard. As the dog approaches the yard boundary the collar starts to beep. If Fido keeps getting closer and tries to cross the invisible boundary, they get a small electric shock from the collar. 

Virtual fencing for livestock works similarly but has eliminated the need to bury cable (many dog fences have too). Collars containing a battery-powered transceiver are worn by the cows. The collars use GPS, wireless signals, and radio frequency to “talk” to base stations. Cows receive auditory signals that scale up to electric stimuli the closer they get to a virtual boundary established by the livestock manager. The technology allows livestock managers to move their stock without having to physically move fence lines. This lightens time and physical capacity needs for producers while allowing them to increase grazing effectiveness.   

Trials of VF for livestock, particularly sheep and cattle, have been popping up in the U.S. for the last five to six years – often on open, flat rangeland like you find in Kansas. It has only been the last couple of years that trials have shifted to the more mountainous regions of the western U.S. Interest is growing among livestock producers and conservationists in this region, and several companies have entered the virtual livestock fencing market. But the more we learn, the more questions we have. 

To try and answer some of those questions, a group of ranchers, conservation nonprofits, virtual fence venders, state and federal agency representatives, funders, university researchers, and legal experts met in Bozeman recently to share information and ideas. Hosted by the Property and Environment Research Center (PERC) and the Beyond Yellowstone Program (BYP), the convening sought to bring together leaders in their respective fields to begin creating a blueprint toward increased implementation of virtual fencing in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem and beyond. The meetings launched with a video call from Robert Bonnie, U.S. Under Secretary of Agriculture for Farm Production and Conservation, who recognized VF as exciting new technology and looked forward to the results of the convening.   

For almost two days, discussions ranged across topics including conservation implications of VF, social and legal implications of using VF in fence-out states (fence-out states require landowners who prefer not to have livestock on their property to put up fences to exclude livestock instead of requiring livestock owners to put up fences to keep them contained), using VF on public lands, how public land management agencies can regulate and support VF use, and opportunities to scale the technology.  

Several members of the Greater Yellowstone Coalition’s staff attended the convening with the hopes of learning how VF technology can be used to address conservation issues, such as improving big game migration routes, while still adding value for producers. It is already accepted that VF can improve rangeland health by allowing land managers to move their livestock more often through intensive rotational grazing while reducing labor and fencing needs. A healthier range for livestock means a healthier range for migrating wildlife. VF also works well for exclusionary fencing – keeping cows off sensitive riparian areas or out of known sage grouse leks.  

But what else? Could VF be the future of predator-livestock conflict management? Will it really reduce the number of fences on the landscape, allowing migrating wildlife to move with fewer barriers? These and many more questions were raised and discussed during the convening. The answers – maybe. 

Virtual fence for livestock, while out of its infancy, is still in its formative years. Like any technology, it is growing and changing quickly while the world is trying to learn all the ways it can be used. Developers and vendors are eager to learn what producers and conservationists envision for VF so that they can create solutions.  

Additional research is needed to address complex questions about how VF could be used to respond to predator-livestock conflict and the social implications of VF. Targeted trials and pilot projects in mountainous terrain and utilizing various VF products could help guide the use of the technology in our region. State and federal agencies need to develop protocol for utilizing VF on public lands. These steps will then allow potential funders a better understanding of the benefits of VF so that they can confidently support its use. 

Despite all the unknowns, the biggest lessons learned from the convening is that VF should be viewed as another tool in the toolbox, not a one-size-fits-all solution, and it is an arena that multiple groups can work on together to create the best and most valuable technology to benefit all. GYC looks forward to working with existing and new partners to explore and support the role of VF in conservation within the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. 

To stay up to date with GYC’s work on virtual fencing, sign up for our emails!

—Erin Welty, Senior Wyoming Conservation Associate (Cody, Wyoming)