electric fencing
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

46
(FIVE YEARS 7)

H-INDEX

9
(FIVE YEARS 1)

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fredrick Lala ◽  
Patrick I. Chiyo ◽  
Patrick Omondi ◽  
Benson Okita-Ouma ◽  
Erustus Kanga ◽  
...  

Abstract Rail and road infrastructure is essential for economic growth and development but can cause a gradual loss in biodiversity and degradation of ecosystem function and services. We assessed influence of underpass dimensions, fencing, proximity to water and roads, Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), presence of other species and livestock on underpass use by large and medium-sized mammals. Results revealed hyenas and leopards used the underpasses more than expected whereas giraffes and antelopes used the underpasses less than expected. Generalized linear mixed effects models (GLMMs) revealed that underpass height influenced their use by wildlife, with several species preferring to use taller underpasses. Electric fencing increased underpass use by funneling species towards underpasses, except for elephants and black-backed jackal for which it reduced underpass passage. GLMMs also revealed that the use of underpasses by livestock reduced the probability of their use by nearly 50% of wildlife species. Carnivore species were more likely to cross underpasses used by their prey. Buffalo, livestock, and hyenas used underpasses with higher NDVI and near water sources while baboons, dik-diks and antelope avoided underpasses with high NDVI. The findings suggest a need for diverse, and comprehensive approach for mitigating the negative impacts of rail on African wildlife.


2021 ◽  
Vol 99 (Supplement_3) ◽  
pp. 1-2
Author(s):  
Jancy Jeffus ◽  
Ryan R Reuter ◽  
Kevin Wagner ◽  
Laura Goodman ◽  
Todd Parker

Abstract Two experiments were conducted to evaluate the effects of virtual fencing on stress in beef cattle. In both experiments, cattle were contained by either physical, 2-strand electric fencing or by use of a proprietary, GPS-based virtual fencing collar, with no physical interior fencing. In both studies, hair from the tail switch was collected at the end of the experiment, and analyzed for cortisol concentration to measure the accumulated stress experienced by the cattle. Additionally, a subset of cattle were fitted with pedometers to measure behavior responses. In the initial pilot experiment, 55 heifers were grazed for 28 d in either 1 physically-fenced pasture or 1 virtually-fenced pasture. In the second experiment, 59 mature cows and heifers were grazed for 56 d in 1 of 2 physically-fenced or 1 of 2 virtually-fenced pastures (4 pastures total). In the second experiment, blood samples were also collected and NEFA and lactate were quantified in plasma. Only descriptive statistics were summarized for the pilot experiment, which indicated that hair cortisol concentrations were within published ranges for both fence types (0.39 ± 0.32 and 0.37 ± 0.15 pg/mg for physically- or virtually-fenced animals, respectively), and step count and motion index appeared elevated in the first few days of adaptation to virtual fence. The second experiment was analyzed with analysis of variance as a completely random design with pasture as the experimental unit. No effect of fence type was found for behavior (number of steps, standing time, lying bouts, or motion index; P > 0.16). Further, no difference was observed in cortisol, lactate nor NEFA (P > 0.14) concentrations due to fence type. None of this data suggests that virtual fencing is different from physical fencing in the effects on cattle stress and behavior, indicating further research and development of virtual fencing technology are warranted.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan Verdon ◽  
Brian Horton ◽  
Richard Rawnsley

Virtual fencing contains and controls grazing cattle using sensory cues rather than physical fences. The technology comprises a neckband-mounted device that delivers an audio cue when the animal nears a virtual boundary that has been set via global positioning system, followed by an electrical stimulus if it walks beyond the boundary. Virtual fencing has successfully been used to intensively graze cattle using a simple virtual front-fence, but a more complex intensive grazing system comprising moving virtual front and back-fences has not been assessed. We studied the effectiveness of virtual fencing technology to contain groups of Angus heifers within grazing cells defined by semi-permanent electric side-fences and virtual front and back-fences, compared to groups of heifers contained in cells defined only by electric fencing. Four groups of 10 Angus heifers were randomly allocated to a “control” (grazed with a conventional electric front and back-fence, n = 2 groups) or “virtual fence” treatment (grazed with a virtual front and back-fence, n = 2 groups). The groups of heifers grazed four adjacent experimental paddocks that were established using TechnoGrazing™ infrastructure. An estimated 9.5 kg pasture DM/heifer.day was offered in each of three 3 day allocations (9 day study period). Data collected include cues delivered by the neckbands, time beyond the virtual boundaries, pasture consumption for each allocation and heifer live weight changes over the study period. The virtual front and back-fences successfully contained one group of heifers in their grazing cell, but the second group of heifers spent an increasing amount of time in the exclusion zone during the second and third allocations and consequently received an increasing number of audio and electrical stimuli. There were no effects of electric or virtual-fence treatment on live weight change or pasture utilization. By grazing heifers in adjacent paddocks our experimental design may have produced a motivation for some heifers to cross the virtual boundary to regain close contact with familiar conspecifics. Despite this, valuable learnings were gained from this study. Most notably, virtual fencing should not be used to manage cattle that have close visual contact to other mobs. We conclude that the successful application of virtual fencing technology needs to accommodate the natural behaviors of cattle.


2021 ◽  
Vol 1084 (1) ◽  
pp. 012067
Author(s):  
K. Rajalashmi ◽  
V.S. Hemachandira ◽  
S. Saravanan ◽  
M Chandru ◽  
R.S. Kaviyadevi

Animals ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 217 ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan Verdon ◽  
Caroline Lee ◽  
Danila Marini ◽  
Richard Rawnsley

This experiment examined whether pre-exposure to an electrical stimulus from electric fencing attenuates associative pairing of audio and electrical stimuli in dairy heifers. Two treatments were applied to 30 weaned heifers naive to electric fencing. Heifers in the ‘electric-fence’ treatment were exposed to an electrified perimeter fence and two periods of strip-grazing using electrified poly-wire. Control heifers remained naïve to electric fencing. The pairing of audio and electrical stimuli was assessed in a feed attractant trial using manually controlled training collars. Heifers received an audio stimulus (2 s; 84 dB) when they breached a virtual fence after which a short electrical stimulus (0.5 s; 120 mW) was administered if they continued to move forward. If the animal stopped moving forward no further stimuli were applied. By the third training session, electric-fence heifers received a lower proportion of electrical stimuli than control heifers (p = 0.03). The more exploratory interactions a heifer had with the electric fence, the lower the proportion of electrical stimuli she received during training (rs = −0.77, p = 0.002). We conclude that experience with electrical fencing enhanced the salience of the electrical stimulus delivered by manual collars used for virtual fence training.


2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (4.6) ◽  
pp. 401
Author(s):  
Mahalakshmi K ◽  
Kodanda Ramaiah G N ◽  
Nandha Kishore ◽  
K. Ramesh

Farming in areas with elephants has been the norm in many parts of Asia for thousands of years. In particular, farmers have settled closer to areas where elephants are present and started growing crops. Elephant raids occur in the night time where people do not notice the presence of an elephant until it starts an offensive behavior. Such raids damage the crops, harvest storages and homes in addition to causing deaths of humans. A multitude of traditional methods have been developed through the ages to reduce and prevent crop raiding by elephants like shouting, drum-beating, noise-making, use of fire crackers, electric fencing, lights and torches. Such activities may also indicate to elephants that their presence is detected, and that they have to contend with aggressive humans. In the proposed system,   automated detection of the presence of elephant is done by analyzing the infrasonic sounds produced by elephants and they are prevented from entering into farms by propagating the offensive sounds in low frequencies without human intervention. 


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document