Virtual Fencing – RSPCA NSW Provides Feedback on Committee Recommendations Ahead of NSW Government Report Posted on January 17, 2025 In 2024, an Inquiry was established to examine and report on the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Amendment (Virtual Stock Fencing) Bill 2023, which amends legislation to permit the use of virtual stock fencing (VSF) devices. During the Inquiry, in both written submission and evidence before the Committee, RSPCA NSW explained that current scientific evidence highlights significant livestock welfare risks associated with virtual fencing. More research is required in non-cattle species, and in any event operational and technology-specific mandatory codes of practice must be established prior to any legislative amendment. To date, research has focused on the use of this technology in cattle and there is insufficient information available to support safe implementation in any other livestock species. Should the use of virtual fencing be permitted, contrary to the evidence provided before the Committee from multiple expert witnesses and despite these concerns, a statutory review period of 12 to 18 months must be legislated to avoid poor animal welfare outcomes for stock animals in NSW. In accordance with usual practice, the Committee has released a report containing eight recommendations. In due course, the NSW Government will respond to those recommendations. In advance of that response, RSPCA NSW provides the following feedback to the recommendations:  Committee RecommendationsRSPCA NSW Response Recommendation 1 – That the House proceed to debate the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Amendment (Virtual Stock Fencing) Bill 2024 and consider recommendations and evidence from this inquiry. Not Supported - On the basis that Recommendation 2 supports legalising VSF via regulatory amendment, there appears no utility to this recommendation returning the Bill to the Legislative Assembly. Recommendation 2 – That the NSW Government legalise virtual stock fencing by amending the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Regulation 2012 and review these amendments two years after their commencement to ensure they are fit for purpose.Not Supported – RSPCA NSW considers that the preponderance of the evidence taken by the Committee and referred to by expert witnesses, supports adopting VSF with respect to cattle with appropriate protections via mandated Code of Practice, an implementation protocol and thorough review following its commencement. The use of Regulations to achieve that outcome, however, avoids Parliamentary oversight, and there is no evidence that a proper Code can be delivered in a time frame which would support the amendment to the Regulations in the way suggested. The use of virtual stock fencing in NSW should not be legalised ahead of the completion of a mandatory code of practice and without a robust mechanism for monitoring and enforcement. Further, the continued piecemeal amendment of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1979 (NSW) (POCTAA or the Act) and Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Regulation 2012 (NSW) (POCTAR or the Regulation/s) compromises the clarity and effectiveness of the animal welfare legal framework. A complete review of POCTAA and its associated Regulations requires urgent action. Recommendation 3 – That the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development prohibit the use of virtual stock fencing as perimeter fencing or replacing physical perimeter fencing with virtual fencing, when legalising the technology.Supported - RSPCA NSW supports prohibiting the use of virtual fencing as perimeter fencing. Recommendation 4 – That the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development include "herding" in the definition of virtual stock fencing devices, when legalising virtual stock fencing.Not Supported - There is no research available on the stress response of animals being moved by virtual fencing. Any definition, in this context, requires clarification on whether herding includes rapid movement (as is traditionally understood by the term) or whether it is confined to slow movement over time. Recommendation 5 – That the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development limit the use of virtual stock fencing to cattle and sheep when legalising the technology, with a view to broadening its permitted uses in the future.Not Supported – If virtual fencing is legalised, it must be confined to use in cattle. There is insufficient research supporting its safe and effective use in sheep or other livestock species. RSPCA NSW advises that comprehensive and conclusive research must be undertaken per species before virtual fencing is legalised beyond cattle. Recommendation 6 – That the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development develop a mandatory code of practice within three months of the tabling of this report to support the legalisation and regulation of virtual stock fencing, with a draft code to be circulated to relevant stakeholders within six weeks of the tabling of this report. The code of practice should include safeguards including but not limited to: • Stock management considerations including only permitting collars to be used on the intended species, the fitting and placement of collars, regular checking of collars and rapid removal of animals that are non-learners • Collar design including the weight and materials of the collar, release load break points and compliance with electrical device safety standards • The appropriate shape, size and angulation of boundaries for stock animals. • The strength of the electrical stimulus, including the power and duration of the shock • The maximum number of shocks permissible before cessation • The maximum threshold of consecutive shocks • The velocity of an animal at which it will not receive a shock • The prohibition of the ability to manually deliver shocks • The ability to monitor and alert critical welfare data and thresholds • The time lag between data collection and access/reporting • The management and supervision of animals using virtual stock fencing devices Provisionally Supported – RSPCA NSW supports the development of a mandatory Code of Practice. The Code must be designed and consulted on in advance of the commencement of any legislative amendment. Recommendation 7 – That the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development review the operation of internal fencing in regional New South Wales including the benefits and risks of removing redundant internal fences when virtual fences are put in place.Provisionally Supported – RSPCA NSW supports proper exploration and preparation phases as part of policy implementation. However, considering the proportionally low uptake of VSF in other jurisdictions (as a percentage of the total herd), it seems that understanding which producers will be seeking to utilise the technology, and in what ways, would be informative ahead of progressing with a statewide assessment of the internal fencing. Feasibility of using VSF to replace redundant internal fencing should be explored and evaluated, including cost assessments in removing existing infrastructure and reporting on take up by primary producers. This information will be beneficial in estimating a range of risks and benefits in addition to how education and enforcement efforts should be directed and deployed. Recommendation 8 – That the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development develop a community education campaign on the operation, risks, benefits, and lawful use of virtual stock fencing. Supported - Successful implementation also requires comprehensive consultation and training of the relevant enforcement agencies. It will also require information sharing between agencies to permit enforcement and evaluation.
