A new perspective article published in the journal Biological Conservation highlights the potential of virtual livestock fencing to change how ranchers and conservationists manage working lands, according to a May 7 statement from the University of Wyoming.
The topic is important because traditional physical fencing is costly, difficult to adapt, and can be a barrier to wildlife movement. The authors argue that advances in technology could help balance agricultural needs with conservation goals.
The article was led by Drew Bennett, Whitney MacMillan Professor of Practice at the University of Wyoming’s Haub School of Environment and Natural Resources. Co-authors include Temple Stoellinger and Jacob Hochard from the Haub School, Jerod Merkle and Kurt Smith from UW’s Department of Zoology and Physiology, as well as collaborators from organizations such as the Property and Environment Research Center; Stone Center for Environmental Stewardship at University of California-Berkeley; World Wildlife Fund; Greater Yellowstone Coalition; and Wyoming Wildlife Federation.
Virtual fencing uses GPS-enabled collars with software-defined boundaries instead of physical barriers. This allows managers to adjust grazing areas remotely in near-real time, keep animals out of sensitive areas during key periods, and move herds more precisely than with traditional methods. “Virtual fencing has the potential to do for conservation what barbed wire did for agricultural management in the 19th century — it can fundamentally transform how we manage livestock across landscapes,” Bennett said. “What excites me most is that this technology doesn’t force trade-offs between ranching and conservation. Done right, it can genuinely make both better at the same time.”
The authors point out that reducing physical fences may benefit wildlife by improving habitat connectivity while still supporting livestock operations. They cite pilot projects involving migration corridors for ungulates in Wyoming, sage grouse protection in Montana, creek corridor protection in Colorado, managing livestock-wolf conflicts in Oregon, and targeted grazing to reduce wildfire risks in California.
“This technology opens up a new playbook for conservation organizations,” said Travis Brammer, co-author and UW alumnus who works as a conservation director at Property and Environment Research Center. “Conservation groups can now design projects and cost-share arrangements that would have been logistically impossible with traditional fencing. The win-win opportunities are real, and we’re already seeing them play out across the West.”
Barriers remain around costs, technical limitations, animal welfare concerns, data privacy issues, and challenges related to using virtual fences specifically for conservation outcomes rather than just production purposes.
“We’re really just beginning to understand the ways this technology can address environmental challenges on rangelands here in Wyoming and around the world,” Bennett said. “The creativity and ingenuity of livestock producers, conservation practitioners and researchers will be essential in shaping how it develops and unlocking its full potential.”
The article concludes by encouraging partnerships among policymakers, producers,and organizations through policy reforms,pilot projects,and research initiatives.
