Progress report for FW24-006
Project Information
Rangelands of the western US sustain the livelihoods and communities of many ranchers and their families. They are, however, becoming increasingly difficult to manage given the prolonged drought most of the western US has experienced over the last decade. Such conditions constrain the rangelands’ ability to produce sustainable forage under conventional grazing management systems. We hope to mitigate these negative effects of drought on forage productivity by implementing the virtual fence technology. We believe that virtual fencing can be used to manage cattle in such a way that reduces the pressure on forage by allowing for more rest. If true, this could lead to greater forage resilience in a climate of ever prevalent drought.
Virtual fencing, however, is a relatively new technology with very few accounts of its effectiveness by ranchers. We, therefore, plan to not only experimentally use virtual fencing to potentially restore heavily grazed areas of our eastern New Mexico rangeland but also share our experiences with installing the infrastructure, learning the technology, training the cattle, and assessing rangeland health with our neighbors and other ranchers across the western US. This rancher-focused perspective is sorely needed when other ranchers are considering adopting a new, risky, and expensive - but potentially sustainable - management tool.
Research objectives:
- Gain an in-depth understanding of the technology, software, and additional management needs, from a young rancher’s perspective, when using virtual fencing for adaptive cattle grazing on an eastern NM rangeland.
- Test whether virtual fence technology can be used to implement a new cattle management system to provide rest to highly used areas, and increase forage production and drought resiliency.
Education objectives:
- Develop outreach materials for other ranchers and agency managers that communicate the benefits, drawbacks, unforeseen expenses, and management decision points of using virtual fence technology to implement new cattle management systems, from a rancher’s point of view.
|
|
YR1: 4/1/2024 – 3/31/2025 |
YR2: 4/1/2025 – 3/31/2026 |
YR3: 4/1/2026 – 3/31/2027 |
Project Team Member Involved |
|||
|
Objective/Activity |
Spr-Sum |
Fall-Win |
Spr-Sum |
Fall-Win |
Spr-Sum |
Fall-Win |
|
|
RESEARCH PLAN Objective 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase virtual fence infrastructure |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
Petersons |
|
Record information about set-up and management of virtual fence technology |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
Petersons |
|
Manage cattle |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
Petersons |
|
Objective 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase supplies for resilience study & set-up sites |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
Petersons, K. Hulvey, M. Nasto |
|
Collect data: vegetation biomass |
X |
X |
X |
Peterson, K. Hulvey |
|||
|
Collect data: remotely sensed NDVI for greenness monitoring |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
M. Nasto |
|
Analyze data |
|
X |
|
X |
|
X |
K. Hulvey, M. Nasto |
|
EDUCATION PLAN Objective 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discuss virtual fence technology with neighbors |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
Petersons |
|
Develop outreach materials describing if virtual fence technology requires a rancher to spend more time on the ranch, or enables a rancher to spend less time |
X |
X |
Petersons, K. Hulvey, M. Nasto, J. Juen |
||||
|
Write outreach materials on: (1) risks/rewards of virtual fence technology, and (2) fire risk |
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
Petersons, K. Hulvey, M. Nasto, J. Juen |
|
Write WLA On Land article |
|
|
|
X |
|
X |
Petersons, K. Hulvey, M. Nasto, J. Juen |
|
Participate in WLA On Land podcast |
|
|
|
X |
|
X |
Petersons, K. Hulvey, M. Nasto, J. Juen |
|
Develop a WSARE Research & Education grant proposal |
X |
X |
X |
X |
Petersons, K. Hulvey, M. Nasto, J. Juen |
||
Cooperators
- - Technical Advisor
- - Technical Advisor
- - Technical Advisor
- - Producer
Research
Our goal is to use virtual fence technology to manage cattle in eastern NM to improve forage resilience to drought. Our objectives are:
- Gain an in-depth understanding of the technology, software, and additional management needs, from a young rancher’s perspective, when using virtual fencing for adaptive cattle grazing on an eastern NM rangeland.
- Test whether virtual fence technology can be used to implement a new cattle management system to provide rest to highly used areas, and increase forage production and drought resiliency.
We are building on a National Fish and Wildlife Foundation project that provided funding to purchase virtual fence infrastructure (e.g., collars and towers). This WSARE study will fill gaps by evaluating: (1) the risks/rewards of virtual fence technology, and (2) whether virtual fencing improves rangeland health.
The U-Bar Ranch
The U-Bar is 29,000 acres, and owned and operated by Peterson Land and Cattle. There are 15 pastures, ranging from 600-5,000 ac. Fifty percent of the ranch resides off the Caprock Escarpment5 - a geologic feature made of calcium carbonate rock - in a mixed shinnery oak-dominated rangeland. Historically the east side of the ranch, on top of the Caprock and where our study will take place, has been heavily grazed due to it housing the ranch’s only corrals. Because of this, the spring and fall calving herds pass through the pastures surrounding the corrals multiple times a year for cattle working, and the vegetation gets heavily grazed and trampled as a result. Neighboring ranches are similarly set up with one set of corrals located on the Caprock
Objective 1
We have not found many rancher testimonies of virtual fencing, and feel this is a gap that needs to be filled. We have questions on the risks and rewards of using virtual fencing especially within the context of drought and wildfire.
We expect there will be an increase in cattle work with the implementation and use of virtual fencing. Some of this work includes attaching the cattle collars and replacing collar batteries as needed. We estimate we will need to work cattle twice a year to accommodate this. By contrast, we normally work cattle once a year. Because of this extra work, we will examine the following: How much time will it take to learn the virtual fence software and geospatially map the fences as we move cattle? Will we save labor hours using virtual fencing compared to moving cattle by horseback that we can then dedicate to other tasks needed to run our ranch?
In addition, we are concerned that wildfire risk increases with use of virtual fencing because this technology doesn’t allow for the instantaneous movement of cattle. Once a fence perimeter is remapped, it takes up to 24 hours for the system to reprogram. This is an issue that virtual fence companies have not considered6. Wildfire risk is high in our area of eastern NM7, we therefore need to learn how to map our fences where the cattle can be moved immediately if needed.
We will address our questions by doing the following:
- Document the time it takes to learn the virtual fence technology, including any unexpected problems and tips other ranchers would benefit from if installing a similar system.
- Determine if virtual fencing changes how we spend time on the ranch. It may reveal topics to be researched in future studies such as: Are ranchers spending more or less time on the land?
- Evaluate wildfire risk that comes with virtual fencing. We will make notes on discussions with virtual fence companies, evaluate the risks for our cattle in case of a wildfire, and explain solutions we develop.
For each of the above, we will produce outreach materials to share with other ranchers and management agencies.
Objective 2
We will also address: Will the added time it takes to learn the virtual fence technology be worth the benefit to the rangeland? To us, this tradeoff is worth it if we can manage the rangeland in a way that makes it more drought resilient.
Our biggest advantage in virtual fencing is being able to graze specific areas of varying soil/vegetation types within our current pastures. The majority of our pastures are sandy loams with some areas containing more clay. The cattle tend to graze more heavily on the clayey portion of pastures as it sustains more desirable grasses. With virtual fencing, we will create new pastures, move cattle to less desirable areas, and facilitate extra rest where needed.
To learn if virtual fencing improves drought resilience, we will use it to create two treatments: (1) areas with no change in grazing, and (2) areas with increased rest. We will assess drought resilience by measuring: annual forage production and the ability of vegetation to respond to summer rain by producing added green biomass.
- Forage Production - Forage productivity correlates with cattle use8. We expect added rest will produce more forage biomass because plants will be healthier with stronger root systems. We also expect that added rest will provide more standing biomass for grazing in future years. We will test for differences in forage production among treatments by including grazing exclusion cages and clipping, drying, and weighing cage biomass once/ year at peak biomass. We will also clip plots outside of cages to look for treatment differences in standing biomass.
- Remotely-sensed rangeland greenness - Rain in eastern NM is critical in late summer because a green flush at this time provides additional foragable cattle feed9. With the current drought such added forage is critical to facilitate forage production earlier in the season. We will use remotely-sensed rangeland greenness to document the ability of vegetation to convert summer moisture to green forage. Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) can be used to estimate greenness on the land10, and we will use the NDVI images produced frequently by the Sentinel-2 satellite to track changes in forage response to moisture. We expect that areas with more rest will add more green biomass than areas that don't have rest.
Research Objective 1: Gain an in-depth understanding of the technology, software, and additional management needs, from a young rancher's perspective, when using virtual fencing for adaptive cattle grazing on an eastern NM rangeland.
Time Requirements to Learn the Virtual Fence Technology
In YR1, we documented the time it takes to learn the virtual fence technology, including problems and tips other ranchers would benefit from if installing a similar system. In all it took 2 months of continued use to become familiarized and comfortable with the virtual fence technology. This included the time it took to install the software on our computer and learn its functionality, conduct the cattle training program, how to efficiently collar the cattle and how to effectively move the cattle from one virtual fence to another.
Learning the functionality of the computer software was relatively straight-forward with the help of a virtual fence technological support staff guiding you through it. Most of the software programming is simple to use on a daily basis, however if we come across an issue, we are able to reach out to our virtual fence technological support staff at any time for zero cost.
The cattle training program took 96 hours to complete. The program was designed to acclimate the cattle to the sound, vibration, and show of the collars by creating smaller and smaller virtual fence perimeters. We, however, have a larger training pasture then desired for training. When we followed the training method, we found that it was difficult for the cattle to have that large of a pasture cut in half as quick as the training program desires. The training program could be improved upon, for larger pastures, by cut off smaller portions of the pasture at a time. It will lengthen the training process, but we feel it would increase the success of the training program therefore, being less stressful on the cow herd.
In addition, we found that the training program could be improved upon by including a feed-truck scenario. This is because our cattle are familiarized with our feed trucks, and they run towards the feed truck, or a truck they believe to be a feed truck. This is a somewhat unique challenge given that our grazing allotments are open to pronghorn and deer hunting, and hunters tend to drive trucks that resemble our feed trucks. Shortly after we turned out our collared cattle, hunters drove through our allotments, and the cattle mistook them for our feed trucks. As a result, they build up the energy needed to break through the virtual fence perimeter despite being shocked. Therefore, we believe that where and when relevant, other ranchers should include a feed-truck scenario in their cattle training program.
It also took a considerable amount of time to not only collar the cattle but figure out how to efficiently collar cattle in such a way that the collars can't be removed. For example, we collared six bulls and five of them lost their collars during the breeding season. We also had multiple cows lose their collars from rubbing on mesquite bushes. It took multiple events of recollaring fallen off collars to find the right level of tightness to keep the collars on the herd. Of course, it may not always be necessary to collar bulls in addition to the cows. We benefitted from it, however, given that we learned - via the collar's GPS tracking - that one of our bulls was not performing during the breeding season.
One of the biggest challenges with using virtual fence technology is the battery life of the collars. We expected a battery life of about nine months but realistically got more around six months of use before needing replacement. A six month lifespan, fortunately, works well for our operation but it remains a stressful process for the cattle and a tedious process for us.
Despite the fact that the virtual fence technology required behavioral changes to the cattle, we maintained a 99.8% breeding rate. We, therefore, believe that the collars were not a detriment to the breeding aspect of our operation.
There are a number of anticipated challenges we expect to address in YR2. These include but are not limited to: 1) whether or not the integrity of the herd can be maintained throughout the dormant season in the event of collar failures, and 2) whether or not calving will be hindered by the new grazing system.
Time Management with Virtual Fence Technology
In YR1, we document how we spend our time on the ranch, and if it has changed with the implementation of virtual fence technology and a new grazing rest-rotation system. We found that we saved time with the cattle grazing in smaller virtual fence pastures, instead of larger pastures, by having less area to monitor. We are able to feed and check water much quicker. We reallocated that time to increased monitoring of pasture quality and more time spent on the software managing the virtual fence pastures. We also found that we, personally, spent more time solving water issues that we didn't have prior to concentrating our herd into smaller virtual fence pastures. We learned we need to improve water supply on certain areas of the ranch to continue to use virtual fence technology successfully.
Wildfire Risks of Virtual Fence Technology
While we, fortunately, have not experienced a wildfire in YR1, we did discuss how a wildfire can impact our operation when using virtual fence technology with our virtual fence technological support staff. We learned that the collar updating process is not fast enough to move the cattle quickly if needed from a wildfire. Our stagey is to build our virtual fence pastures with the use of permanent fence as a boundary with no virtual fence on that permanent fence on one side. Therefore, if we need to move the cattle quickly from a wildfire, we can find a gate on that permanent fence or cut the fence to move the cattle to safety.
Research Objective 2: Test whether virtual fence technology can be used to implement a new cattle management system to provide rest to highly used areas, and increase forage production and drought resiliency.
We think that our biggest advantage in using virtual fence technology is being able to create new pastures, move cattle to less desirable areas, and facilitate extra rest to more desirable areas where needed. In YR1, we created five relatively small virtual fenced pastures within a pasture (i.e., Antenna) that has historically been grazed heavily (2024 Virtual Fence Boundaries). We moved our cattle from virtual fenced pasture to virtual fenced pasture relatively quickly (Table 1).
Table 1: The start dates, end dates, and size of virtual pastures used to manage cows and calves for specific periods of time.
| Pasture | Virtual Pasture | Start Date | End Date | Acres | Days | Cows | Calves |
| Antenna | 1 | 3/8/2024 | 4/8/2024 | 581.5 | 32 | 120 | 120 |
| Antenna | 2 | 4/9/2024 | 5/17/2024 | 705.3 | 39 | 120 | 120 |
| Antenna | 3 | 5/18/2024 | 6/11/2024 | 604.9 | 25 | 120 | 120 |
| Antenna | 4 | 8/11/2024 | 8/30/2024 | 958.9 | 20 | 120 | 0 |
| Antenna | 5 | 8/31/2024 | 9/7/2024 | 447.2 | 8 | 120 | 0 |
We are particularly interested in learning if virtual fence technology can improve drought resiliency on our allotments. To determine if this is the case, we collected 10-meter x 10-meter resolution satellite imagery of Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) - an index of vegetation greeness - from the Sentinel-2 platform about every 1 - 2 weeks throughout the collared grazing season. While a quantitative analysis of differences in NDVI between virtual fenced pastures and non-grazed pastures, as well as NDVI responses in all pastures to rainfall events, is ongoing, we found - qualitatively - one interesting result thus far. That is that the earlier in the season virtual fenced pastures are grazed, the greater the ability that the vegetation within can respond positively to rainfall events.
Research Outcomes
While we can't in YR1 of this study make definitive recommendations for sustainable agricultural production and future research, we can address some potential research outcomes at this time. These include but are not limited to: 1) The hope that the implementation and use of virtual fence technology will enable us to more effectively manage our pastures and build forage resilience to drought; and 2) The hope that the new effectiveness of cattle grazing will decrease expenditures on supplemental feed, even allow us to reduce our stocking rate, and sustain our ranch’s profitability. We believe this study could be a unique pilot program aimed to help inform not only ourselves on the risks and rewards of implementing and using virtual fence technology, but our ranching neighbors and those in the greater western US, as well. We plan to openly communicate our successes and failures with other ranchers from our own personal perspective, creating a key information stream that doesn’t currently exist. Such rancher testimonies are essential for the adoption of new and potentially sustainable agricultural practices when economic and cultural livelihoods are on the line.
Education and Outreach
Participation Summary:
Currently, there is a lot of interest in using virtual fencing to implement adaptive cattle management on rangelands across the western U.S. but there are not many resources for understanding the benefits, risks, and considerations for how to use it to achieve desired management outcomes. Our goal is to share this kind of information, and co-produce knowledge with all partners involved in implementing such virtual fencing projects including: ranchers, land managers, and other stakeholders. To do this, we will address the following objective:
- Develop outreach materials for other ranchers and agency managers that communicate the benefits, drawbacks, unforeseen expenses, and management decision points of using virtual fence technology to implement new cattle management systems, from a rancher’s point of view.
Locally
We are active members of our community in eastern NM, and take great pride in helping our rancher neighbors and friends when it is needed. We regularly participate in our neighbor’s cattle working, and spend time with their families. In doing so, we shared our opportunity in acquiring, installing, and using virtual fence technology, and have received much interest in learning more in return. Whether it is in the cattle pens, on horseback, or at the dinner table, we will discuss all that we have learned - from the good, the bad, to the ugly - of incorporating virtual fence technology into our cattle operation. These conversations will take place throughout all years of our study.
At the Agency Level
We work closely with CEHMM, NRCS, BLM, and the NM State Lands Office. These agencies have helped us carry out multiple projects on our ranch from the installation of water lines and the treatment of invasive shrubs to several pilot studies of rest-rotation grazing effects on forage production. We will continue to engage with these groups by developing fliers, fact sheets, and articles. One will describe the general risks and rewards of using virtual fence technology that can then be shared with other local and interested ranchers. Information here will discuss the time it takes to learn the virtual fence software and technology, as well as any unexpected problems and any tips other ranchers would benefit from if they install a similar system. A second will share the time savings or expenditure of installing, learning, and maintaining a grazing system managed - in part - by virtual fencing. It is commonly thought that virtual fencing will save time in day-to-day management of cattle as a rancher may not have to move cattle from one pasture to another manually. It may, however, require a rancher to spend more time on the land to assess forage production in utilization as the cattle are moved much more deliberately across the ranch. Finally, a set of outreach materials will focus on an issue that is particularly important to us, which is how to ensure that virtual fencing does not increase the risk of wildfire to our cattle. In particular, in our discussions with representatives from various virtual fencing companies, none seem to understand how cattle behavior in an emergency situation such as a rapidly spreading wildfire might impact the safe movement of a herd when a virtual fence is involved. We think this is the type of shared learning that our project can bring to the discussion of the benefits and risks of virtual fencing for ranchers. These outreach materials will be developed in all years of our study.
Across the western US
We intend for the fliers, fact sheets, and articles described above to also reach ranchers, land managers, and other stakeholders beyond those in our region of eastern NM. For example, we will continue to develop our partnership with WLA - a non-profit organization advancing policies and practices that sustain working lands, connected landscapes, and native species. Through WLA, we will share what we have learned with respect to the risks and rewards of incorporating virtual fence technology into our cattle operation, how it affects the economics of our operation, and its potential risk in the context of wildfire in On Land magazine articles, as well as on On Land podcast episodes. We will contribute to WLA’s media platform in years 2 and 3 of our study.
Education Objective 1: Develop outreach materials for other ranchers and agency managers that communicate the benefits, drawbacks, unforeseen expenses, and management decision points of using virtual fence technology to implement new cattle management systems, from a rancher’s point of view.
We engaged with the local and regional community of ranchers and land managers in a number of ways to communicate everything we have learned thus far about using virtual fence technology to manage cattle for greater rangeland resiliency. These included:
- Multiple discussions / consultations with neighbors about virtual fence technology;
- A presentation about our use of virtual fence technology with the NM Grassland Conservation Collaborative including other ranchers, Playa Lakes Joint Venture, Natural Resource and Conservation Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, NM State Lands Office, Ducks Unlimited, and multiple NM Conservation Districts;
- A U Bar Ranch field tour with the Bureau of Land Management;
- An on-ranch demonstration of our use of virtual fence technology with neighboring ranchers.
- Multiple meetings / consultations to develop new research ideas with neighboring ranchers, Working Lands Conservation, The Western Center, Holistic Management International, and the Thornburg Foundation.
The development of outreach materials and research grant proposals are ongoing.
Education and Outreach Outcomes
Effectively communicating what we have learned thus far about using virtual fence technology to increase rangeland resilience has proven critical for multiple reasons: 1) It increases the collective rancher understanding of how the technology works and what it could be used for; 2) It helps land managers to realize the potential for virtual fencing to be used as tool to improve rangeland health; and 3) It advocates for the important role that ranchers play in rangeland stewardship. We achieved, and are continuing to achieve, these educational results by hosting a variety of events and developing a broad suite of outreach materials that ensured all rangeland stakeholders would be engaged and find resonating.
Increase in awareness of virtual fence technology.
Increase in knowledge of the utility of virtual fence technology.