Virtual fencing gains popularity, but vocal critics remain

Cows are wearing solar-powered GPS smart collars on many farms as part of virtual fencing systems.

Photo: RNZ/Sally Round

There's a split of opinion among vets, farmers and animal welfare groups around animal welfare associated with virtual fencing.

The solar-powered GPS collars, referred to as 'wearables', are widely seen as a big part of the future of farming for dairy cows and beef cattle.

Cows wear electronic collars and their movement is controlled via an app using audio, vibrations and an electric pulse, to stay within the virtual fence.

Many farmers strongly support the technology, others are erring on the side of caution, and some are firmly opposed to one of farming's most significant recent developments.

The technology is increasingly popular around New Zealand, saving on labour and fencing costs as farmers seamlessly integrate wearables into their operations.

There's also considerable commercial potential for the companies leading the charge.

New Zealand agritech Halter has raised more than $300m in funding to fuel global expansion, while Gallagher is actively hiring at its Hamilton headquarters to power its technology division, with its 'eShepherd' collars for cattle soaring in popularity in Australia and other overseas markets.

And with both dairy and beef riding a wave of high prices, farmers have the funds to invest in technology.

The animal welfare charity group Veterinarians for Animal Welfare Aotearoa has released an ethical code for the GPS collars worn by livestock. It says New Zealand is falling behind Australia in regulating virtual fencing technology.

Managing Director Helen Beattie said the collars emit both warning sounds and "electric shocks" to keep or move stock within designated areas.

"Australia has moved to regulate recently where they've said you have to have daily oversight in some jurisdictions," she said.

"They've put limits on how much electricity can be used in other jurisdictions.

"They've talked about who is allowed to train farmers in the use of these devices. It has to be someone employed by the manufacturers, it can't be a quasi-consultancy situation."

Cows graze in a paddock in Canterbury.

Photo: RNZ / Nate McKinnon

The NZ Veterinary Association (NZVA) supports the responsible adoption of virtual herding and fencing, and working with farmers, industry and government to future-proof the technology ensuring animal welfare remains central to it use.

NZVA dairy cattle vet committee member Kyle Kannan was part of the NZVA group presenting to the Select Committee on virtual herding tech.

He works with cows wearing Halter in the Rotorua region, where he's a clinical director at Vet Plus.

"We're definitely in support of regulatory standards being made for this technology," Kannan said, "but right now we're in support of how it's being used on farms, and the outcomes we're getting with animal health."

"When I walk into a paddock with virtual fencing technology, cows with collars will still come up to me and want to scratch, and the ones that don't will turn and walk away, just like a paddock I walk into that doesn't have virtual fencing technology."

Vets for Animal Welfare Aotearoa, however, said more needs to be done to safeguard animals.

It has raised concerns about whether livestock could become trapped against gates or in floodwaters while under the influence of collar technology.

Helen Beattie said she's unsure how much electricity is administered and how much it fluctuates.

"The premise is aversive training, and that's the use of electrical shocks if animals bump up or come close to the perimeter," Beattie said.

"We'd like transparency around how often are they getting shocked, and how much shock."

"There's lots of different ways the shock can be applied, so we'd like transparency around that."

Golden Bay dairy farmer Tim Rhodes has been a past critic, and he still strongly opposes the use of virtual fencing.

"I wouldn't even think about running those collars. I think it's very damaging to a cow's psyche, because they become hard-wired to the collars and they no longer respond to humans," Rhodes said.

The Ministry for Primary Industries says virtual fencing is currently legislated by the collar and tethers section of the Animal Welfare Act.

Its spokesperson said the current code for dairy cattle, and the code for sheep and beef cattle, has requirements for how farmers must meet obligations for animal welfare.

"Wearable collars, such as those used for virtual fencing technologies, are managed under Regulation 47 (Collars and Tethers) of the Animal Welfare (Care and Procedures) Regulations 2018," said MPI director of animal health and welfare, Trish Mead.

"The codes specify that dairy and beef cattle must be handled in a way that minimises the risk of pain, injury, or distress, and that only the minimum force required must be used when moving dairy and beef cattle."

Mead added that the code of welfare for dairy cattle is currently under review, as is the code of welfare for sheep and beef cattle.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.