Epsilon Archive for Student Projects

Abstract

Virtual fencing is an increasingly utilized technology in pasture-based livestock systems, offering opportunities to reduce labour demands and improve management efficiency. Currently virtual fencing has been adopted in several countries, including Australia, New Zealand, the United States of America and Norway. Sweden has adopted the use of virtual fencing as of January 2026, following legislation making it illegal prior to this date due to concerns from the general public and various industry stakeholders regarding its use and the impacts on animal welfare. The aim of this literature review is therefore to review existing scientific literature on virtual fencing in cattle production, with a focus on how system characteristics may influence animal welfare.
The most prominent concern regarding animal welfare and the use of virtual fencing is an animal’s ability to learn the technology. However, the current reviewed literature shows that cattle generally learn to associate the audio cues given by the virtual fencing technology with the electrical pulse administered within a few days of training. Thus, allowing them to avoid further electrical stimuli by responding to the audio cues with direction changes away from the virtual boundaries. Nevertheless, individual variation in learning and uncertainty regarding long-term memory retention of this learning highlights the importance of appropriate training, reinforcement and understanding the technology learning process thoroughly.
Virtual fencing is primarily adopted to improve grazing flexibility, reduce labour associated with physical fencing, improve animal monitoring and support adaptive grazing strategies. It can also be used to exclude cattle from environmentally sensitive areas and may aid in predator management through improved location tracking. However, while virtual fencing does not eliminate labour but shifts it towards collar management and digital planning, it does decrease the physical management of fencing, particularly within a rotational grazing system.
Current evidence indicates that virtual fencing does not negatively affect cattle welfare when compared to traditional electric fencing. Research generally reports no consistent negative effects on cortisol concentrations, body weight, feed intake, lying behaviour, activity or productivity. Short-term behavioural responses (e.g. vocalisation or increased activity) may occur during the initial learning phase, but these typically decrease as animals adapt. Welfare assessment should therefore consider both physiological and behavioural indicators (animal-based welfare indicators) as well as resource-based indicators such as pasture accessibility, forage availability and water intake. A comprehensive evaluation of welfare cannot be achieved without considering all these factors.
Overall, virtual fencing offers a flexible way to manage grazing without compromising animal welfare compared to traditional electric fencing. Cattle typically adapt through learning, but welfare outcomes depend on factors like individual animals’ learning ability, system design, grazing intensity, stocking rates, and attentive management. The variation in welfare indicators used across studies emphasize the importance of developing more standardized assessment methods to better understand and improve outcomes.