Get reliable rangeland science

search

cow wearing VF device

Webinar 3: Exploring the Boundaries of Virtual Fence

VF Economics

Photo by: Michael Stauder

Watch the Recording!

If you attended the live session or watched the recording, please complete the survey.

Webinar Summary:

Join us to learn about virtual fence (VF) economics, including the benefits, costs, returns over time, and tools to help make informed decisions. We hope this webinar will empower you to effectively evaluate VF for sustainable rangeland management.

This 1-hour webinar is the third and final of a three part series on VF. We will not cover VF 101 or VF applications. For more information on these topics see Webinar 1 and Webinar 2.

Topics:

Presented by:

Dari Duval, Analyst, Economic Impact, Agricultural Resource Economics, Arizona Cooperative Extension
Ryan Reuter, Professor, Department of Animal and Food Sciences, Oklahoma State University

For more information on virtual fence, explore the virtual fence user guide.

View the VF User Guide

There are several companies that manufacture hardware and software including eShepherd™ from Gallagher™, Halter™, Nofence™, and Vence™. Virtual fence components from different manufacturers are generally not interoperable or interchangeable. Specific components, GIS data needs, software protocol, software training, frequency and duration of the cues, GPS error, livestock collaring, and livestock training protocols may vary depending on the manufacturer. Follow the manufacturer’s recommendations and guidelines. The University of Arizona and The Rangelands Partnership do not endorse a specific product.

This material is based upon work that is supported by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture, under award number 2021-38640-34695 through the Western Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education program under project number WPDP22-016. USDA is an equal opportunity employer and service provider. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

This work is supported by the AFRI Foundational and Applied Science Program: Inter- Disciplinary Engagement in Animal Systems (IDEAS) [award no. 2022-10726] from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture.

Additional funding for the University of Arizona’s Virtual Fence program was provided by Arizona Experiment Station, the Marley Endowment for Sustainable Rangeland Stewardship, Arizona Cooperative Extension, and The Nature Conservancy.