Hittinger, the chair of Gateway Research Organization, collaborates with Results Driven Agriculture Research (RDAR) and is involved with the On-Farm Climate Action Fund (OFCAF).

“The opportunity came up and they were looking for someone to trial the system, and I thought it might be a good fit for my operation,” said Hittinger, who runs 200 head on 1,600 acres of pasture.

WHY IT MATTERS: More virtual fencing options in Canada give ranchers more opportunities to find the right fit for their operation.

How Halter works

The Halter system, created in New Zealand, uses GPS-controlled collars with a solar panel to charge the battery. Hittinger’s trial will also examine how the units function in Canadian cold weather.

Using an app or an aerial image on the internet, producers set up virtual fences wherever they want them.

“You don’t have a physical fence in place. You tell the map, ‘This is where I want this virtual fence to be.’ It downloads the GPS information to each collar, and the collars then know whether they are inside or outside of that boundary, and they guide the cows that way,” he said.

Hittinger can program a virtual fence for a specific herd and put cattle in an area of pasture that is not cross-fenced.

“I draw the fence in the app on the map, and that information is downloaded to the collars via Wi-Fi and then the collars know via GPS signal where they are in proximity to that,” he said.

Cattle are directed into a specific area, called a break. If they try to cross the virtual fence, the collar gives off an audible tone.

“If they continue to cross and continue further, then they get a shock that’s delivered by the collar,” he said. “Once they’re all trained, they will turn around at the sound of the tone. The shock usually provides a second level warning.”

Other virtual fencing options in Canada include systems by Gallagher, NoFence and Vence. Unlike the Gallagher system, where the collar hangs on a strap around the cow’s neck, Halter uses a metal fibre woven into the collar itself.

“The collar looks like a seat belt. They’re adjustable and you can fit them to fit with certain tension on their neck. You don’t want them to fall off, but you don’t want it too tight, particularly on younger animals. You need to provide some room to grow,” said Hittinger.

Advantages of the Halter system

Hittinger has found several benefits. He can manage cattle location from anywhere.

“I can do it from wherever I am,” he said.

He can also divide feeding into blocks on a flexible schedule.

“If I want to do one-day blocks, I could feed, say, five one-day blocks of feed. Or I could do a week’s worth, say, seven blocks of feed. Right now, we’re feeding five silage bales a day. I can roll out five bales in each of the seven paddocks and then have it so the virtual fence moves every day at a set time, whenever I decide that should be,” he said.

The primary benefit is moving cattle without physical fencing.

“For winter feeding, that makes swath grazing quite a bit easier. That makes bale grazing quite a bit easier because I don’t have to go wading through the snow and worry about the cattle pushing on the electric wire, or all the issues surrounding fencing in a winter-feeding system,” he said.

Bred heifers and second calvers with higher nutritional needs can be grouped separately.

“I will go out and feed the bulk of all of these animals in one group, but those animals that need extra nutrition, I give those animals access to a separate area where they can get better hay,” he said.

In summer, Hittinger will be able to rotational graze using half-day, one-day or three-day moves — whatever suits his operation.

Cost and practical considerations

The Halter system is subscription-based at $97 per collar. Towers must also be purchased at about $6,000 each. By comparison, Gallagher collars run about $350 to $400 depending on volume.

Hittinger noted that producers still need a perimeter fence even with virtual fencing. During windstorms or lightning, cattle will scatter and cross the virtual boundary.

The Halter system will be eligible under OFCAF funds for the new funding year, which opens April 10, 2026. The Canadian Forage and Grassland Association also has funds available for producers who want to try the system.

The post First Canadian trial of Halter virtual fencing system underway near Westlock appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“If you have a technology that can’t work in -40 or -45, it has no place in Alberta,” said Lakeland College’s Obioha Durunna.

Virtual fencing could fundamentally change the labour and infrastructure required to run cattle, assuming it works and producers can manage the price tag.

The virtual fencing tests are an offshoot of an ongoing swath grazing study that compares the production and profitability of the practice in cereal monoculture (oats) versus a multi-species forage mix.

The three-year project began in 2021. A 30-acre site was divided into six five-acre paddocks. Durunna seeded the areas with either CDC SO-1 oats or a forage blend that consisted of oats, turnips, rapeseed and forage peas.

The paddocks were set up with electric fencing. In the first year of the study, 42 cattle were divided evenly among the six paddocks. Cattle were initially allowed to graze the first 40 feet of the paddocks. The fence was then moved a further 40 feet through the course of the study, giving animals access to fresh swaths.

In the second year, Durunna changed tactics. The number of cattle was raised to 60 in the 2022-23 grazing season and half were fitted with virtual fencing collars.

Hi-tech swath grazing

Durunna had seen growing interest in virtual fencing among livestock farmers, and he also knew there was a knowledge gap regarding how the technology works. So, when Ed Bork of the University of Alberta’s Rangeland Research Institute offered to let him borrow 30 collars, he gladly accepted.

“These tools need to be tested before producers jump on them,” said Durunna. “I think that’s what research institutions are supposed to do — help these producers navigate the world of emerging technologies. For us it was also a learning opportunity.”

The virtual fencing system was from a Norwegian company called NoFence. It consists of a collar worn by the animal and an app that can be downloaded onto a tablet or smart phone. The app and the collar communicate over the mobile network, which allows the app to monitor animals and notify the operator if something unexpected happens.

The collar emits a tone if an animal approaches the boundary and gives a one- to three-kilovolt shock if it crosses. It is said to take about a week of training for the animals to understand the connection between the tone and the shock.

“Some of them learned within a day or two,” said Durunna. “All they need is to associate the tone with the electric pulse that they will receive. If they get close to the virtual boundary, that’s when the tone comes up, and the best way to stop that tone is to turn around. So once they learn that, that’s it.”

He didn’t want to jeopardize the data collected for the swath grazing study, so he left the conventional fencing in place as insurance in case the virtual fencing failed.

Thus there were no labour savings, which are main advantage promised by the technology.

But after his first year of testing, Durunna said he’s confident the collars are an effective tool to manage and track livestock.

“Some managed to sneak through, but this happened probably only two times,” he said.

In terms of how the system performed over a cold Prairie winter, Durunna said he was impressed.

“We were surprised in terms of average battery life. They really hold up. We saw that they had over 95 per cent charge retention.”

As Durunna enters the final year of his study, he hopes to acquire more collars for the cattle.

“We didn’t have enough collars [last year]. We had 60 steers and only 30 collars. If you have some with collars and some without, those without collars can sneak through the fence, but the ones with collars cannot.

“It kind of brings up some behavioural dynamics. So, this year, we’re planning to put collars on all the animals.”

Past efforts

Durunna’s research trials aren’t the first to test virtual fencing in Canada and probably won’t be the last.

In 2021, a pilot program in British Columbia tested it in the wake of wildfires that required extensive fence rebuilding at a high cost.

A project initiated by the Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association also aims to evaluate the technology in northern Saskatchewan.

That project was originally slated to begin this year, but Merck Animal Services recently acquired the company (Vence), which was to provide the virtual fencing system. The SSGA project was put on the back burner as a result.

Chad MacPherson, general manager of the SSGA, said a cattle producer in the region approached his organization about testing the technology.

“When you’re having to push through solid bush and bog in different areas, or if you have short-term leases on forestry or First Nations land and it’s unknown how long you’ll have access to it, it makes economic sense,” MacPherson said.

Aside from time and money saved in terms of building and maintaining physical fencing, it can also help ensure that cattle are getting into different areas.

“Cows just naturally want to find places close to water bodies to camp out on, but if you can force them to get out further and utilize more of the grass, it’s more efficient and economically viable. Especially if you’re going through a forest,” said MacPherson. “It makes most economic sense in situations where fencing is cost prohibitive.”

The Saskatchewan study is back on track and set to begin next year.

“We are hoping to get the base tower set up in the fall, do some training with the producer on the software and be prepared to roll it out in the spring for the grazing season,” MacPherson said.

Competition

In addition to Vence and NoFence, other companies are vying for a piece of the virtual fencing market. Gallagher Animal Management, out of New Zealand, produces the e-Shepherd system, while HerdWhistle, out of Calgary, is the lone Canadian company in the marketplace with its CattleShield product.

“One thing that they all have in common is limited availability,” said Durunna. “So I think they’re either being rolled out gradually or they don’t have the capacity to manufacture enough to meet the demands.”

None of the companies appear to be clamouring for new customers. Vence has a notice on its website indicating it is only working with large-scale operations. Gallagher asks customers to fill out a form to see if they qualify. NoFence has a note requesting producers to register, saying they will let customers know when products are available.

HerdWhistle could not be reached for comment.

Once economies of scale start to do their thing, Durunna sees a bright future for the technology.

“They are very convenient and very simple to use for producers, but cost is a huge barrier,” he said, noting the units cost more than $300 each.

“For it to be economical, it has to beat the cost of setting up physical fencing. Right now, I think it works better for folks with smaller herd sizes and bigger spaces, such that they could rotationally graze a few animals on a few acres.”

– This article was originally published at the Manitoba Co-operator.

The post The arrival of virtual fencing? appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

And it could become reality, says a University of Alberta professor who is testing Nofence collars, a product that its Norwegian maker bills as “the world’s first virtual fence for livestock.”

“We see a lot of potential for these collars,” said Edward Bork, who is also director of the university’s Rangeland Research Institute.

“You could move them from your pickup truck — or your living room or your kitchen.”

The collars work on the same principle as those used for dogs: Get too close to the virtual boundary set by a global positioning system (GPS) and a chime sounds. Cross the boundary and the collar produces a weak electric shock.

But keeping a pet in the yard is one thing, controlling cattle on pasture is a whole other ballgame.

“There are a lot of producers in Europe who are successfully using virtual fencing right now,” said Alexandra Harland, a master’s student working with Bork who tested the collars at the Roy G. Berg Kinsella research farm.

“My research is really focusing on the practicality of using these collars in an Alberta landscape. There are definitely some challenges that would come with wanting to start using these collars.”

One is a sort of bovine version of the ‘range anxiety’ that electric car owners experience — you don’t want the herd busting loose because the batteries in the collar died.

But so far, the two solar panels on the collar seem up to the job of keeping the lithium battery charged.

“They appear to be able to handle the extreme conditions, the short daylight and cold temperatures that we have here in Alberta,” said Bork. “Even in that really cold period of December, they kept running. The battery readings that we saw when we were looking at them online had dropped to about 80 per cent. But once it warmed up, they actually rebounded.”

The box containing the GPS antenna hangs from the collar by two chains (which deliver a shock that’s about a quarter of what an electric fence would).

“The GPS uses satellites to track in real-time, where that animal is throughout the day and night,” said Bork.

The second part of the system is a mobile app that works on a cell phone.

“The app is where you have the control centre,” said Harland. “You can use the app to basically create virtual pasture boundaries.”

“The collar downloads the new boundary and then uses that as the reference for containing the animal,” added Bork.

When using the app, the user sees a satellite-view map. The boundaries are made by creating fence posts, and then dropping and dragging them.

“You can easily create all sorts of oddly shaped pastures,” she said.

And you can also see where every animal is in the field.

“You basically have an app that allows you to go in and see where that animal is at any point in time,” said Bork.

But, not surprisingly, you need a strong internet connection to make those two features work.

“The collar system can operate without internet,” said Harland. “But if you want to do any sort of rotational grazing, if you want to change pastures or edit pastures, if you want to receive notifications about shocks or escapes, and if you want to be able to monitor your cattle in real-time, you need an internet connection, both where the collars are and where your cellphone is.”

Animals that are using virtual fencing also need to be trained.

“You don’t just deploy these collars and say, ‘Have at it’,” said Bork.

He and Harland trained the animals by using a physical fence and creating a virtual fence that matches it. When the animal approaches the buffer fence, they get an audio warning (a chime) from the collar. If they don’t leave the area, they get a shock.

To test the collars, the researchers would take large paddocks and break them into several smaller ones with one true, fully virtual fence line to go through it. They then tracked how many animals cleared the fence.

When they wanted to rotate, they moved the virtual fence, and the animals moved.

“You can rotate animals quite effectively,” said Bork. “By the end of the summer, the animals were figuring out how to work the audio tone, which is really cool. They would work the boundary. They could see the green grass, would walk a little bit into the virtual fence, and grab a bit of food and then walk back.”

The researchers also tried grazing paddocks with no water, creating corridors to the water source.

“You can actually create corridors for them to access water,” he said. “You can do some really innovative things with this fencing over time.”

Another big hurdle is cost — $350 for a single collar — although that might come down as the technology becomes more commonplace.

The University of Alberta is doing the largest study on the Nofence collars, but Lakeland College and Olds College have been experimenting with some collars.

Last summer, Harland successfully rotationally grazed 49 heifers and two bulls using a virtual fencing system. This year, the researchers are hoping to run a trial with cow-calf pairs.

“That’s the interesting one because you don’t want to put the collars on a calf,” said Bork. “What we would probably do is look at the fidelity of the cow to the pasture, knowing the calf could serve as a distraction to lure them out.”

The post Imagine moving your cattle with just a swipe on a smartphone appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

One of the mightiest storms to hit the U.S. mainland in recent years, Ian flooded communities on the Gulf Coast before plowing across the peninsula to the Atlantic seaboard.

The hurricane washed out roads, hampering farmers’ attempts to corral cattle before they escape fenced areas in a potential threat to public safety.

“We’ve got trees all over the fence lines right now,” said Brian Shoop, who raises cattle in Hillsborough County, where Tampa is located. “The biggest concern is cattle getting out of the pastures and on the roadways.”

Cattle first arrived in the United States in Florida in 1521 on an expedition led by Spanish explorer Juan Ponce De Leon, according to the state and the Florida Beef Council. The state now has more than 1.6 million cattle, about two per cent of the U.S. herd, the U.S. Department of Agriculture said.

Nationally, cattle supplies this summer fell to the lowest level in about seven years as producers in the western U.S. increased slaughter due to intense drought.

Shoop, who owns about 750 mother cows, said he restricted cattle at one location to roughly 40 acres from 300 acres while he repairs fences.

“It’s only a temporary Band-Aid,” he said. “You shut ’em down to a small area and you’ve got to worry about whether you have enough feed and water.”

Flooding is preventing some cattle from eating or resting, as fields were already wet from rains before the hurricane, said JB Wynn, a producer in Lake Wales.

“They don’t have any grass to graze on or anywhere they can lay down,” Wynn said.

Some help is coming from out of state. Stephen Broadwell, owner of livestock services company Ranch Solutions in Erwin, N.C., said he is co-ordinating volunteers to travel to Florida to repair fences or supply feed.

“Everybody is just scrambling,” Broadwell said.

— Tom Polansek reports on agriculture and ag commodities for Reuters from Chicago.

The post Florida farmers scramble to reach cattle after Hurricane Ian appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

One technology being studied uses collars on animals that emit a series of audio warnings and, if need be, an electric pulse, when livestock approach an invisible boundary set with GPS coordinates.

“The animals are actually able to get trained with the collars in a period of four days and were very quick to realize that whenever they hear the audio cue, they need to change direction so they don’t get the electric stimuli,” said Laio Sobrinho, a researcher at Olds College who has been studying the system developed by Norwegian company Nofence.

About 40,000 collars have been distributed, mostly in Europe. The system uses a smartphone app to adjust grazing boundaries.

“From the app you can actually see how the location looks because it’s Google Maps satellite imagery integrated into the platform,” said Sobrinho. “So it’s very easy to locate your pastures and check for fencing and it has good accuracy. You can set up pastures of any size or shape.”

[CANADIAN CATTLEMEN] Testing virtual fencing’s potential in B.C.

One mile of fencing can cost thousands of dollars in Alberta, said Sobrinho. Because the system can be used to move cattle from one pasture to another, it makes rotational grazing easier.

“That’s a big gain for ranchers,” he said. “You can also reduce conflict with wild animals. Moose and deer can’t get all wrapped up in the fence. It’s also easier to protect riparian areas around creeks, which we know are sensitive.”

With virtual livestock fencing deployed around the world, why is the technology under-utilized in Canada?

“Slowly we are getting there,” said Sobrinho. “Actually Nofence, because of the amount of time they have been in the market, they have the largest number of devices. There are other companies that we are aware of that are working to produce their own collars. So over time, I think competition is going to improve.”

Sobrinho and his colleagues are trying to validate the technology so they can better inform farmers about how it works. They’re examining battery life and the small solar panels that are integrated into the collars. The batteries and solar panels work well during grazing season but how they fare in winter is of particular interest, said Sobrinho.

A made-in-Canada system

“Some of the challenges that you have to be aware of are what happens if an animal or herd breaks through the virtual fence,” said rancher Kevin Boon, the association’s general manager. “How do they get back in? You’ve got to have the ability for the system to shut down once they’ve crossed the virtual fence so they can come back in.”

A big incentive is the “astronomical” cost of fencing in B.C., said Boon, noting 1,500 kilometres of fence were burned during the 2017 and 2018 wildfire seasons. The replacement cost was around $25,000 per kilometre. The cost and inconvenience of maintaining traditional fences is another major consideration.

“In no way do we think that virtual fencing will replace all of the fences,” said Boon. “Perimeter fencing needs to be done in all of this. This is more designed for exclusionary fencing. It’ll be used more as a tool for managing cattle and where they’re at.”

Keeping cattle out of sensitive areas for environmental reasons and away from species at risk are two other advantages of virtual fencing.

“It creates a more open plane where our cattle are not in the face of everything, so it’s more compatible for a more balanced landscape,” said Boon. “I think part of the appeal of an association representing cattle ranchers trying to do this is it’s not only progressive, but we’re trying to make something where we can do the right thing in an environmentally friendly manner.”

The virtual fence system his association is developing (with an assortment of partners) must work well and be affordable, said Boon. The association is also focusing on animal welfare protocols during testing.

“This also gives us another opportunity to manage these cattle effectively in terrains where we typically have very limited ability to manage,” he said. “We’ve hired the technicians. We’ve got a partnership with some of the technicians putting it together, and we are just in that development stage for a prototype. We are hoping to do some more testing again later, either this fall or over the winter.”

Dr. Natasha Kutryk, a cattle farmer and vice-president of the Alberta Veterinary Medical Association, said she’d be interested in using a virtual fence system on her farm even though the technology is in its infancy.

“Hopefully in my lifetime it becomes a reality,” she said. “Land being a limited resource and only becoming more and more expensive, the better we can manage it and make it more productive, the better for your operation. So rotational grazing is definitely the way to manage your land.”

Contrary to popular belief, cows are intelligent animals that will have no problem habituating to virtual fence systems, said Kutryk, not unlike how dogs learn virtual fence perimeters. However, no technology is 100 per cent reliable.

“You’d have a very big problem if your herd of cattle were roaming at large, especially if you distressed your neighbours and everyone else. You could utilize it for rotational grazing with a reliable physical perimeter fence. If the technology fails it wouldn’t be that big of a risk.”

The post Virtual fence systems could be the next breakthrough in ranching appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The province on June 16 announced “supplemental relief” via the Provincial Disaster Assistance Program to help farmers who didn’t qualify under PDAP’s usual eligibility rules.

Usually small businesses, including farm operations, must book gross annual income of more than $4,000 and less than $2 million, and employ no more than 20 people full time, to be eligible for PDAP coverage, which compensates applicants for damages up to a maximum of $500,000.

PDAP is meant to help cover the cost of uninsurable essential losses, cleanup, repairs and temporary relocation. For farms, eligible damages can include items such as fencing, bales and field erosion.

However, the province said June 16, “in Saskatchewan it is reasonable for a family run farming operation to exceed this threshold in gross annual revenues, but not have the capacity to recover without government assistance.”

The new supplemental program, combined with existing PDAP services, is expected to help producers in eligible areas that saw “substantial losses or damages to uninsurable property.”

The province emphasized the programs are “not intended to compete with private insurers or to provide full compensation to those who incur a substantial loss or damage to property.”

Municipalities or other local authorities where farmers or other businesses were affected first must request designation through the PDAP office to initiate assistance for residents. Once a municipality is PDAP-designated, residents then have six months to apply.

Anyone who’s applied to the PDAP program as a result of the spring storms will automatically be considered for the supplement and won’t require a separate application, the province said.

Municipalities declared eligible so far following April’s storms include the RMs of Antler, Argyle, Arlington, Benson, Brock, Brokenshell, Browning, Cambria, Cana, Chester, Coalfields, Cymri, Elcapo, Enniskillen, Estevan, Garry, Golden West, Grayson, Happy Valley, Hart Butte, Hazelwood, Key West, Kingsley, Lake Alma, Lomond, Martin, Maryfield, Montmartre, Moose Creek, Moose Mountain, Moosomin, Mount Pleasant, Norton, Piapot, Poplar Valley, Reciprocity, Rocanville, Silverwood, St. Louis, Storthoaks, Surprise Valley, Terrell, The Gap, Walpole, Wawken, Wellington, Weyburn, White Valley, Willowdale and Wolseley and the town of Maple Creek.

The town of Springside was declared eligible following a freezing rainstorm in May, as were Manitou Beach and Watrous following a rainstorm and overland flooding earlier this month. — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post Saskatchewan shores up disaster program for bigger farms appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The province said Wednesday in a budget release that a “number of clarifications” will be made to its Provincial Sales Tax (PST) Regulations effective April 1 relating to “farming and agriculture activities.”

Noting such lists are reviewed each year, a finance ministry spokesperson said Thursday the changes being made are “relatively small” in terms of reduced provincial tax revenue, at about $1 million per year.

The list of items and activities to be specifically included in the list of on-farm PST exemptions starting April 1 are expected to address concerns raised by producers over what they viewed as “PST creep.”

The province thus consulted with ag groups on what their members viewed to be “unfair or inconsistent” application of PST.

“While not significant in dollar value, these changes will clear up a number of issues included on these lists,” the ministry spokesperson said via email.

Items, services and activities to be specifically listed as PST-exempt for on-farm use starting April 1 include:

• corral slabs and windbreaker panels;
• insulators for electrified cattle fences;
• portable seed cleaning equipment, if used on-farm and not by for-profit operators of mobile custom seed cleaning services;
• certain chemical storage tanks and water storage tanks;
• crawler tractors, if to be used on-farm and not in the construction sector;
• on-farm digging of dugouts; and
• on-farm trenching for “certain irrigation and electrical purposes.”

The updates to the PST code will also further clarify the exemption for “certain farm equipment attached to a registered vehicle,” the ministry said.

The ministry said it also plans to start discussions with the goal of “modernizing” the agriculture and farming sections of the Provincial Sales Tax Act.

Those changes, the ministry said, may “potentially be considered by the government as part of the 2023-24 budget development cycle.” — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post Saskatchewan clarifying certain on-farm PST exemptions appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

But a new federal program may assist livestock producers in upgrading to a grazing system that advocates say is more profitable and makes ranches more resilient.

The federal government wants more cattle producers to adopt rotational grazing and is making it one of the centrepieces (along with cover cropping and more efficient nitrogen use) in its $200 million On-Farm Climate Action Fund.

That’s a bonus for a practice that has already proven its worth, say grazing experts.

“Rotational grazing is light years ahead of continuous grazing, which is just turning animals out in one big area,” said Bart Lardner, a professor at the University of Saskatchewan.

Research has shown rotational grazing not only produces more forage per acre but also more nutritious forages and that, in turn, lowers methane emissions from cows, he said.

“A good grazing system that is thought out to provide adequate rest for those forage species at the same time provides high-nutrient value feedstuff to the grazing animal,” said Lardner.

“There’s no doubt that many studies show that high-quality diets reduce production of enteric methane.”

And reducing this type of methane emissions (enteric means from the gut of ruminants) is something producers need to embrace because it isn’t just a government preoccupation, said Cedric MacLeod, a New Brunswick rancher and executive director of the Canadian Forage and Grassland Association.

“As primary producers, we’re seeing it from a number of levels, both political and operational on the business side,” said MacLeod. “These value chain players are making commitments to their consumers, and there’s only one way to achieve that and that’s through on-farm action.

“We’ve got to deliver a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. This is the kind of path they’ve chosen.”

Specifics about the On-Farm Climate Action Fund haven’t been announced as Ottawa hasn’t yet chosen the “delivery partners” that will run specific programs. (The call for proposals only closed in late September.)

The program might see subsidies for capital costs (most of which are for fencing and watering systems). But it is the management part that is most daunting for many producers, said Lardner.

“The take-up of adoption of it is challenging — it’s a time commitment,” he said, adding each farm needs to take a tailor-made approach. “Many operations are multi-enterprises. Is it straight cattle or cropping? Do they have another operation on that farm or ranch?”

Producers need to first consider the right stocking rate, intensity, frequency, duration and timing, and then create a setup to allow that.

“When you want to set up a rotational system, you have to think about fencing, you have to think about waterways, you have to think about alleys,” he said.

Those sorts of challenges may be the reason why the number of producers using this system is low.

“The Census of Agriculture will suggest that rotational grazing is deployed on about 25 per cent of beef farms,” said MacLeod.

But the term is not clearly defined and the true number is much lower, he added.

“Active rotational grazing management is at about five per cent in Canada,” he said.

But the payoff is worth the effort, both men said.

In certain areas of the country, rotational grazing could boost forage productivity by 25 to 50 per cent, although in many parts of the Prairies it might only be 10 to 15 per cent.

But that’s still a sizable boost, said MacLeod.

Studies have shown a rotational grazing system produces more pounds of beef per acre than a continuous grazing system, added Lardner. They have also found soils stay moister in a rotational grazing system and the pastures are more resilient, he said citing one of his students who ranches near St. Brieux (northeast of Saskatoon) who was hit by the severe drought last summer.

“He didn’t run out of pasture,” he said. “He could get in there and get off and allow some rest. It goes a long way. You leave litter and your soil health is better, and the hoof impaction is there.

“All of these things are improving the resource — the soil — at the same time as trying to reduce enteric emissions.”

Some of the research Lardner and his team are working on right now is on integrating different crop types, specifically legumes, to reduce emissions further.

And while the number of active rotational grazers is still low, many are enthusiastic advocates who are both refining management systems and spreading the word about its benefits. Many are in Alberta, said Lardner, who started his academic career in the province (at the old Fairview College). He pointed to the Foothills Forage & Grazing Association, Peace Country Beef & Forage Association and other farmer-led research groups in the Agricultural Research and Extension Council of Alberta (ARECA). The Canadian Forage and Grassland Association has been trying to encourage wider adoption and works with groups such as ARECA and provincial forage councils, said MacLeod.

“The other groups that we’ve started to engage a lot more with is the conservation community,” he said. “Watershed groups are doing a lot of good work around watershed management and fencing infrastructure and are key partners in these kind of projects.”

The post Rotational grazing set to get a boost from climate action plan appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

In some ways they’re right — like any kind of electrical circuit, an electric fence requires a source of power, a conduit, some kind of ground and usually insulators.

But, as is often the case, it’s only as good as its weakest link.

An effective fence starts with what you put in your shopping cart, said Greg Paranich, a self-described electric fence “troubleshooter.” Some producers cheap out on components or make tiny compromises to their detriment, he said, adding he’s as guilty as anyone on this score.

Paranich did everything “to the nines” when he built his first electric fence more than three decades ago.

“But something in my head said ‘I’ve spent enough money,’” he recalled. “Instead of buying the recommended galvanized ground rods I used lengths of rebar steel every farmer has by the shed or the barn — they were handy and cheap and I had them.”

Now he knows better.

“When I upgraded my grounding system to where it was supposed to be, I noticed a dramatic improvement in how much more consistent my entire power system would operate.”

Powering up

If you’ve never built an electric fence before, “start small, start basic, but start,” said Paranich, an agricultural field specialist with the Grey Wooded Forage Association.

“I always encourage people to look at their long-term picture and break it down to their basic core design,” he said. “It’s like you’re building an electrical transmission system across your farm or ranch.

“Start with the basic conduit of how your power is going to get out. Sometimes it might just start by putting in the one transmission line that would bisect the pasture. From there you can tap off of it just like you would tap off the power line that goes past your property.”

Choosing the power of the energizer (the units that electrify the fence, also called the ‘fencer’) depends on a number of factors, particularly fence length. You may want to talk to a vendor or other expert before making your choice, but in Paranich’s experience it’s best to choose an energizer that’s more powerful than what you need in the short term.

“I always err on the side of having more (power) than you need because when you expand the fence, you’re always going to be within the capability of that energizer. That’s really important. I’ve seen systems that were built very well structurally but they didn’t have enough power generation. It’s like having a great truck but putting a tiny engine in it — it’s not going to perform to how it’s designed.” 

As far as other considerations go, well, that depends.

“The answer to 95 per cent of ag questions begin with the phrase ‘it depends,’” said Paranich.

“It’ll depend a lot on what your circumstances are from one field to the other, what they are from one ranch to another, what your resources are, and what your vision is and what you want from it.

“Those are the type of discussions we have when we build anything — whether it’s a fence or a barn or any kind of structure.”

Staying grounded

The process of briefly shocking an animal is essentially the creation of a circuit. The fencer provides an electric current through the wire, the animal receives the shock and the electricity is returned to the earth via some kind of ground. In the case of electric fences, that usually means a ground device buried deep into the earth.

In order to work effectively, a ground device has to be conductive. Water itself is highly conductive, and that’s why moist soil can be an ideal conductor. However, dry or frozen ground can cause a system to work below expectations and so galvanized steel ground rods buried six to nine feet (with a few inches showing) are used.

While emphasizing he’s not an electrician, Paranich said the main reason galvanized steel is the best choice is because it doesn’t corrode.

“If you have different types of metal like aluminium or steel they will have an ionization in between them which can cause corrosion and minimize the amount of direct contact. At different points you’ll be losing some of that energy,” he said.

So why do the rods have to be buried so deep?

“You want to have them going down deep enough so you’re ensuring that ground contact with any current travelling through the ground,” he said.

High-tensile wire recommended

Producers can sometimes be reluctant to make the leap from barbed to high-tensile wire. Although barbed or twisted wire can be used, it’s usually not considered optimal.

“With twisted wire both wires will be energized, but there are gaps between them that can cause shorting,” said Paranich. “Anytime you have an air gap between the connection you can get some bleeding of power.”

The standard for a permanent electric fence is 12.5-gauge high-tensile wire. Thinner gauges are typically not appropriate as it’s like connecting a garden hose to a powerful water pump, he said.

“When you’re pushing that power out of your energizer and it doesn’t have the proper gauge of wire going out, then you’re restricting the capability of how much energy it can actually carry,” he said.

There can be a bit of a learning curve with high tensile wire and consider consulting an expert the first go-around, said Paranich, who recommends not setting this wire inflexibly stiff like many barbed-wire fences. Wires can expand or contract depending on the weather and you want about the same baseline tension in either case.

“In the fall before winter l might go around and loosen up the tension of the wire on my fences slightly,” he said.

Although they come in many forms, insulators are typically plastic or ceramic devices attached to fence posts and are intended to prevent shorts between the electrified wire and the post. Paranich highly recommends them.

“There are people in Alberta saying ‘We don’t use them — we just up the power.’ That could work but you will get some shorting out.”

Insulators must be made from high-quality material, he added.

“I find that over time — and that might only be two seasons — that cold and UV rays start to break down the plastic and they get brittle and break. Whereas if I buy lots of good-quality insulators, they’ll last for years and years.”

The post Here’s how to stay (properly) grounded when installing electric fencing appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

In response, Canada dropped a threat to impose billions of dollars of retaliatory sanctions, marking the end of a spat between the major trading partners.

Among the items Ottawa had proposed last month for new retaliatory tariffs were U.S.-made drop-centre livestock trailers and aluminum-wire fencing as well as beverage cans, aluminum foil, major household appliances, wheel rims, office furniture and door and window frame components.

The U.S. Trade Representative’s office said the decision came after consultations with Ottawa determined that aluminum imports during the September-December period of 2020 were expected to fall 50 per cent from the January-July period.

U.S. President Donald Trump had reimposed a 10 per cent tariff on non-alloyed, unwrought aluminum from Canada in August after a surge in imports across the northern U.S. border.

Canadian Trade Minister Mary Ng said the U.S. announcement marked an end to an “incredibly difficult” few months for domestic producers.

“Canada has not conceded anything. We fully retain our right to impose our countermeasures if the U.S. administration decides to reimpose its tariffs on Canadian aluminum products, and we are prepared to do so,” she told a news conference in Ottawa.

USTR said that it now expected raw aluminum imports from Canada to be 70,000 to 83,000 tons per month through December. If it is determined that in any month imports exceed 105 per cent of those levels, USTR said it will retroactively impose the 10 per cent tariffs on all shipments for that month.

Canada has always rejected the idea of quotas on aluminum exports. When questioned about the U.S. levels, Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland said: “This is not a negotiated deal… we have not negotiated an agreement with the United States on quotas”.

Rio Tinto Aluminum CEO Alf Barrios said the U.S. move was “a positive step that ensures the North American aluminum supply chain remains strong in the face of challenging global conditions.”

— Reporting for Reuters by David Lawder in Washington and David Ljunggren in Ottawa; additional reporting by Jeff Lewis in Toronto and Tim Ahmann in Washington. Includes files from Glacier FarmMedia Network staff.

The post U.S. to remove tariffs on Canadian aluminum appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.