Hubbry Logo
Cattle gridCattle gridMain
Open search
Cattle grid
Community hub
Cattle grid
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Cattle grid
Cattle grid
Cattle grid
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
A cattle grid on a country road in the Yorkshire Dales
Cattle grid on a railway line in northeastern New Mexico
Cattle grid in Galong, Australia

A cattle grid – also known as a stock grid in Australia; cattle guard, or cattle grate in American English; vehicle pass, or stock gap in the Southeastern United States;[1] Texas gate in western Canada and the northwestern United States;[2] and a cattle stop in New Zealand English – is a type of obstacle used to prevent livestock, such as sheep, cattle, pigs, horses, or mules from passing along a road or railway which penetrates the fencing surrounding an enclosed piece of land or border. It consists of a depression in the road covered by a transverse grid of bars or tubes, normally made of metal and firmly fixed to the ground on either side of the depression, so that the gaps between them are wide enough for an animal's feet to enter, but sufficiently narrow not to impede a wheeled vehicle or human foot. This provides an effective barrier to animals without impeding wheeled vehicles, as the animals are reluctant to walk on the grates.

Origins

[edit]

The modern cattle grid for roads used by automobiles is said to have been independently invented a number of times on the Great Plains of the United States around 1905–1915. Before that period, a similar device for railroads was in use at least as early as 1836; a stone stile was used in Britain as far back as pre-Roman times.[3] An article in Texas Monthly claims that the "first recorded use of a cattle grid for nonrail traffic" occurred in 1881 in Archer County, Texas, on the stagecoach road between Archer City and Henrietta.[4]

Uses

[edit]
Cattle grid on country road

Cattle grids are usually installed on roads where they cross a fenceline, often at a boundary between public and private lands.[5] They are an alternative to the erection of gates that would need to be opened and closed when a vehicle passes, and are common where roads cross open moorland, rangeland or common land maintained by grazing, but where segregation of fields is impractical. Cattle grids are also used when otherwise unfenced railways cross a fenceline. Cattle grids are common worldwide and are widespread in places such as Australia, the Scottish Highlands, or the National Parks of England and Wales. They are also common throughout the Western United States and Canada. In the United States, they are often used on Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service land, but are also used on paved roads and entry and exit ramps of the Interstate Highway System in rural areas. In Lapland, cattle grids are also used to prevent free-range reindeer from entering fenced areas such as road areas or lumber yards or crossing international borders.

Variations

[edit]

Almost all cattle grids are built around a grid. Most include a pit dug along a fence line, a base for the grid to rest on, and wings to connect the guard to the fence. Since many guards were or are home-made and to some degree idiosyncratic, a wide variety of designs exist. Designs may vary with local conditions. Materials used for construction of a cattle grid depend partly on the weight it must bear.[6]

A study of the bars of traditional cattle grids in the Flint Hills of Kansas found that 80 percent were made of pipe, while smaller percentages were made of railroad rails, I-beams, planks, and other materials. The size of the bars varied from 38 to 165 millimetres (1+1⁄2 to 6+1⁄2 in); the spaces between bars varied from 44 to 203 millimetres (1+3⁄4 to 8 in); the number of bars per grid varied from 4 to 22. Grids differed in length from 2.4 to 9.1 metres (7+3⁄4 to 30 ft) and in width from 1.0 to 3.0 metres (40 to 120 in), while the pits beneath grids were 0.0 to 2.5 metres (0 to 98 in) deep.[6]

Cattle grids, as they are called in Great Britain, Ireland, and South Africa, are known by a wide variety of other names in other parts of the world. In the United States, they are cattle guards. Mata burro ('donkey killer') is the preferred name in Brazil and Venezuela, while guarda ganado ('cattle keeper') is what they are called in Argentina. Alternatives in the United States include car crossing, auto gate, corduroy gate, stock gap, cattle pass, run-over, and many others. Canadians use pit gate, vehicle pass, and Texas gate, as well as cattle guard, which in Canada refers mainly to guards at railway lines.[7]

Concrete

[edit]

Cattle grids made entirely or mostly of concrete have existed since the 1940s.[8] Individual ranchers have often constructed their own, sometimes using plans developed in the 1940s.[8] In the 21st century, a set of plans for do-it-yourself guards made of wood and concrete are available via the web site of the Missouri Alternatives Center at the University of Missouri in the US.[9] Commercial precast concrete versions are also available; Smith Cattleguard Company, based in Virginia, sold more than 15,000 of them between 1960 and 1980.[8] Manufacturers also produce commercial polyethylene forms with reinforcing rods. Placed in or on the ground and filled, a finished cattle grid with 4,000-pound-per-square-inch (28 MPa) concrete reinforced with 5⁄8-inch (16 mm) fiberglass (GFRP) rebar can support vehicle loads of up to 32,000 pounds (15 t) per axle.[10]

Steel

[edit]

University Lands, which manages land and mineral interests for a foundation supporting the University of Texas and Texas A&M University systems, publishes do-it-yourself manuals for three sizes of cattle grids with grids made of steel pipes. The manuals include schematic drawings as well as accompanying instructions.[11] Commercial guards made of steel are also available from multiple companies.[12]

Virtual

[edit]
A "virtual grid" near Lone Pine, California

Painted lines on the road can serve as skeuomorphs of cattle grids. The light-dark pattern of lines on pavement resembles a true cattle grid to animals, and by association think they will not be able to cross. Using a virtual cattle grid is initially cheaper than a true cattle grid,[13] but the cost of periodic re-painting may eventually exceed the initial cost of a well-built metal guard.[14] A particular advantage of painted guards is that they are smooth to drive over; in the US, most are found on state or federal highways, rather than private roads.[14]

Why they work is unclear, but it is most likely related to the bovine visual system. Experts say that "a cow's depth perception is such that it makes little or no distinction between painted stripes on a dark background and bars over a pit."[15] Cattle may acquire the behavior of avoiding grids over pits either from individual experience or through imitation of other cattle. However, painted grids have been reported to work with semi-wild cattle with no prior exposure to virtual grids.[15]

Cattle can sometimes defeat virtual guards. A station owner in Queensland, Australia, told a reporter that after some of his old bulls leaped a painted grid, the younger ones lost their fear of walking across.[16] This is common; if one member of a herd discovers it can step safely on the lines, others will follow. Other incentives that lead cattle to test a virtual guard include placing food on the opposite side, or using strong driving pressure to run panicked cattle over a virtual grid.[13]

Electric

[edit]

Electric cattle grids use electricity to deter animals from crossing the fence line. There are different designs. One uses high-tensile wire run across the roadway, about 3 to 4 inches (8 to 10 cm) off the ground, attached to a power source on one side.[17] The primary advantage is cost and ease of installation.[18] Drawbacks include the necessity of spraying vegetation with herbicides to keep weeds from shorting out the grid if there is no barrier between the wires and the ground. In addition, some low-riding vehicles can catch the wires and tear them out.[17]

James Hoy in The Cattle Guard discusses four kinds of electric guards. One that was patented in Illinois in 1955 and another invented in New Zealand in 1979 are similar; each resemble "something like the framework of an old-fashioned metal bed" connected to a battery or high-powered fence charger. They are easy to drive across, but may pose a danger to children or animals that get stuck in the guard.[19] Another type was patented in two versions by an Oregon inventor in 1956–57; it consisted of 20 current-carrying synthetic rubber strips mounted on a wooden frame. The invention proved highly effective in deterring all animals, including dogs, and it was maintenance free, easy to drive over, and safe. However, the company that acquired the manufacturing rights stopped production in 1960.[19] A fourth type, homemade, consists of two sections of woven wire or steel plate laid on a concrete slab and set apart from one another on either side of a fenceline. The wire sections are then connected to an electric fence or to a separate charger, either conventional or solar-powered.[19]

Effectiveness on wildlife

[edit]
A cow successfully crossing a cattle grid

While cattle grids are most effective on cattle, they can be used to exclude deer and elk.[20][21][22] Research has shown that deer can cross cattle grids with flat, as opposed to rounded bars.[23] Sometimes a cattle grid is doubled to exclude these animals. A cattle grid requiring a horizontal leap of 14 feet (4.3 m) is considered effective when combined with a deer fence.[24] Striping is also painted on roads as a visual deterrent to deer, as with "virtual" cattle grids.[25]

Limitations and risks

[edit]
A cattle grid and straying sheep

While these barriers are usually effective for cattle,[26] they can fail due to ingenious animals. Sheep searching for food have been known to jump across grids, step carefully into the spaces,[27] or run along the side of grids as wide as 8 feet (2.4 m).[28]

Wider grids are used where wildlife is to be contained. Some animals can jump across them, and a barrier that stops deer needs to be at least 16 feet (5 m) wide.[26] Bison, and bulls in particular can easily jump across an 8-foot (2.4 m) barrier, and have been known to jump widths of up to 14 feet (4.3 m).[29][30]

In areas with heavy snowfall and long periods without a thaw, snow can accumulate beneath a grid and allow animals to walk across.

Horses are particularly vulnerable to cattle grid injuries, as their single-toed hooves can slip between the bars and trap their legs in an easily broken position.[26] The same risk exists for kangaroos in Australia's outback, with additional risk of entrapment.[31]

Cattle grids are generally useless for containing goats.[26] However, a Texas Highway Department official reported that adding three 20-inch (51 cm) painted stripes—arranged yellow, white, yellow—on the road in front of a cattle grid deterred goats from approaching or crossing the guard.[32]

Cattle grids produce noise when vehicles pass over them and people living in a 100 m radius from the grid can be affected.[33][34]

Patents and standards

[edit]

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (US PTO) issued patent U.S. patent 1125095A on January 15, 1915, to William J. Hickey, Reno, Nevada, for a cattle grid. The patent expired in 1932.[35]

There is a British Standard for cattle grids: BS4008:2006.[36] The US standards are put forth by The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). AASHTO provides load rating guidelines for cattle grids that are used on public roads in the US. All cattle grids used on US public roads must be certified by a qualified engineer that the grid meets AASHTO guidelines.[37]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Cattle grid

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A cattle grid, also known as a cattle guard, is a barrier device installed across roads, driveways, or pathways in rural areas, consisting of parallel metal bars or pipes spaced 3 to 5 inches apart over a shallow pit or depression, designed to prevent livestock such as cattle, sheep, horses, and other hoofed animals from crossing while permitting the safe passage of vehicles and pedestrians. The mechanism of a cattle grid exploits livestock's natural aversion to unstable surfaces and fear of falling through the gaps between the bars, creating an optical and physical illusion of a hazardous void that deters crossing without physical restraint; this psychological barrier is typically 99% effective for cattle, though less reliable for smaller animals like sheep or wildlife, which may require additional fencing or modifications. Cattle grids originated from ancient flat stone stiles in Cornwall, England, dating back over 2,000 years, but the modern form evolved in the United States with railroad cattle guards patented as early as 1836 to protect tracks from roaming livestock amid expanding rail networks and legal liabilities for animal injuries. Roadside versions emerged in the late 19th century, with the first documented non-rail installation in Archer County, Texas, in 1881 along a stagecoach route, and widespread adoption occurred in the early 20th century on the Great Plains due to the rise of automobiles in fenced ranchlands, where they replaced labor-intensive gates and symbolized efficient range management. Today, cattle grids are commercially manufactured from durable materials like steel or concrete, often featuring angled wing fences to seal gaps and prevent circumvention, and are used globally in agricultural, conservation, and roadway settings to control animal movement, reduce human-livestock conflicts, and minimize maintenance costs—saving ranchers significant time and effort annually—though they require proper design and installation to avoid entrapment of non-target species like deer or reptiles. Regional variations include wooden-pole constructions in early designs and electrified enhancements for added deterrence, with the term "cattle grid" common in British English and "cattle guard" in American usage.

Overview

Definition and Terminology

A cattle grid is a physical barrier consisting of parallel metal bars or rails installed over a shallow depression or pit in a roadway, designed to prevent livestock such as cattle, sheep, and other hoofed animals from crossing while permitting vehicles and pedestrians to pass without interruption. Some designs are pitless, relying on elevated bars without a depression. The device is known by various regional terms reflecting local linguistic and agricultural conventions. In the United States, it is commonly called a "cattle guard," while in the United Kingdom, the preferred term is "cattle grid." Australians refer to it as a "stock grid," and in New Zealand, it is termed a "cattle stop." Core physical components include parallel bars typically spaced 4 to 6 inches apart to deter animal passage by accommodating vehicle tires but risking hoof entrapment, a pit or depression beneath the grid typically 0.25 to 0.5 meters deep to enhance the barrier effect, though shallower or deeper variations exist based on design, and an overall width of 10 to 14 feet to span standard road lanes and support vehicular traffic. The terminology originates in early 20th-century , with "" documented as early as the , though the contemporary was independently developed in the around 1905.

Operating Principle

function through a of psychological and biomechanical mechanisms that deter from crossing while permitting passage. Psychologically, the grid exploits animals' poor and innate of heights, perceiving the gaps between bars as a visual cliff or unstable terrain that could lead to injury from falls or slips. This avoidance is instinctual, rooted in evolutionary responses to potential hazards. For instance, research on dairy heifers exposed to a simulated visual cliff in a milking pit observed elevated heart rates (p < 0.05) and increased stopping behaviors (p < 0.05), confirming of heights and avoidance in cows (Bos taurus). Biomechanically, the design ensures that livestock cannot safely traverse the grid due to their hoof morphology and weight distribution. Cattle hooves, typically 60-80 mm wide per claw in mature animals, are narrower than the standard bar spacing of 100-165 mm (4-6.5 inches), causing hooves to slip into gaps and creating instability that risks entrapment or injury under the animal's 500-1000 kg body weight. In contrast, vehicle tires, with widths exceeding 200 mm, span multiple bars securely. The rounded or flat bar profiles further discourage crossing by providing minimal grip for cloven hooves. Key design parameters enhance these effects: bar spacing must balance deterrence without allowing smaller animals to pass inadvertently, while high contrast between light-colored bars and the dark underlying pit amplifies the visual illusion of depth. Alternating light and shadow patterns, as noted in livestock facility designs, strongly deter cattle by mimicking hazardous terrain. The angle of approach also influences efficacy; a straight, unobstructed path maximizes the perceived barrier, reducing attempts to jump, whereas oblique angles may lessen deterrence if animals can gauge the gap differently. Experimental evidence from animal behavior studies demonstrates high deterrence rates under ideal conditions. For example, studies on white-tailed deer showed reductions in ungulate crossings by 88-98% compared to pre-treatment levels; similar principles apply to cattle due to comparable hoofed anatomy and perceptual responses.

History

Origins

The concept of barriers to prevent livestock from crossing paths while allowing human passage dates back to ancient times, with the flat stone stiles of Cornwall, England, serving as early precursors. These consisted of granite bars over pits in footpaths, deterring animals through the illusion of a void, and represent the ultimate progenitor of modern cattle grids. The earliest recorded use of cattle guards traces back to 1836, when they were employed by railroad companies in the United States to prevent livestock from accessing tracks and causing accidents. These initial devices were designed as barriers at rail crossings, marking an American innovation that addressed the growing conflicts between expanding transportation infrastructure and free-ranging cattle herds on the frontiers. The first documented non-railroad application occurred in 1881 in Archer County, Texas, along the stagecoach route from Henrietta to Archer City, where ranchers installed a grid to contain livestock at road crossings without impeding travel. This implementation reflected early efforts to manage cattle movement amid increasing human activity in ranching regions. Formal development of the modern cattle grid accelerated around 1905–1915 in the Great Plains, from Texas to North Dakota, as ranchers independently devised solutions to keep livestock off expanding roadways. This period coincided with agricultural expansion and the rapid rise of automobiles, which heightened the need for barriers that allowed vehicular passage while deterring wandering herds, thereby reducing collisions and enabling efficient fencing of vast ranges. Pioneer accounts describe rudimentary early versions constructed from wooden planks laid over shallow pits, serving as precursors to standardized metal designs.

Development and Global Adoption

The development of cattle grids evolved significantly in the early 20th century, transitioning from rudimentary wooden prototypes to more durable metal constructions made of or , primarily to address the limitations of wood in harsh environmental conditions. This shift occurred notably in the and during the and , where increased road construction in ranching areas demanded reliable barriers that could withstand heavy vehicle traffic and weather exposure without frequent replacement. In the mid-20th century, cattle grids saw widespread adoption in the United Kingdom following the end of World War II, particularly for managing access to moorlands and common lands in national parks like Dartmoor. The Highways (Provision of Cattle-Grids) Act of 1950 empowered local authorities to install these devices on public roads, replacing traditional gates to facilitate vehicular access while containing livestock, with the first documented installation occurring in 1952 on a mountain road in Wales. Australia integrated cattle grids into its vast outback pastoral stations in the mid-20th century to control livestock movement across expanding road networks in remote arid regions. The late 20th and early 21st centuries marked a broader global of grids, with adaptations in diverse regions to needs. In , known ly as "cattle stops," they became standard on rural roads and entrances to prevent from wandering onto highways. saw extensive of ranching starting in the , aiding the shift from to mixed farming. In Europe, countries like France and Germany incorporated grids along rural roads to manage agricultural boundaries amid post-war rural development. Key drivers included the global post-1950 expansion of road infrastructure, which necessitated efficient livestock controls, and environmental regulations promoting non-invasive barriers to minimize habitat fragmentation and wildlife disruption. Up to 2025, cattle grid technology has seen incremental refinements, with virtual fencing emerging as a cost-effective alternative using GPS collars to create invisible boundaries for livestock, reducing the need for physical installations in expansive or sensitive areas. This trend reflects ongoing adaptations to labor shortages and environmental priorities, though traditional grids remain dominant without major structural innovations.

Uses

Agricultural Applications

Cattle grids serve as essential infrastructure in agricultural settings, primarily installed at fence lines, driveways, and road accesses on farms to facilitate vehicle entry and exit while containing livestock such as cattle, sheep, and other hoofed animals within designated areas. By creating an optical illusion of unstable footing through a grid of spaced bars over a shallow pit, these devices prevent animals from crossing without the need for physical barriers that would impede human or mechanical traffic. This core function is particularly vital in ranching and farming operations where frequent access is required for feeding, monitoring, or transport. The benefits of cattle grids in farming include significant reductions in labor associated with manual gate operations, allowing farmers to save time and effort in daily routines. They also minimize the potential spread of diseases among livestock by eliminating shared gates that could serve as contact points for pathogens. In large-scale operations, such as U.S. feedlots and Australian cattle stations, cattle grids enhance overall efficiency by enabling seamless vehicle movement across property boundaries, supporting practices like rotational grazing where animals are shifted between pastures without constant human intervention. In the United States, particularly the Midwest and Great Plains regions, cattle grids are widely employed on rural roads and farm accesses to manage livestock in expansive grazing areas. Their adoption dates back to the early 20th century in these livestock-heavy states, where they have become a standard feature for containing herds without disrupting agricultural workflows. Similarly, in Australia, cattle grids are integral to vast cattle stations, providing reliable containment for large herds across remote properties while accommodating road and vehicle access. Cattle grids are frequently integrated with broader farm infrastructure, such as warning signage for drivers and adjacent ramps that encourage one-way deterrence for animals attempting to approach from the contained side. Installation costs for a standard unit, including excavation and setup, typically range from $2,000 to $5,000, depending on size, material, and site conditions. For heavier livestock breeds like Angus cattle, adaptations such as deeper pits—often 8 to 12 inches—are employed to heighten the deterrent effect by increasing the perceived risk of falling.

Conservation and Other Uses

Cattle grids play a significant role in wildlife conservation by enabling the containment of domestic livestock in protected areas while facilitating the natural movement of native species. In environments such as national parks, these installations prevent grazing animals from encroaching on habitats designated for wildlife, thereby reducing competition for resources and minimizing human-animal conflicts. For example, in the UK's Dartmoor National Park, cattle grids are strategically placed on roads and tracks to restrict livestock movement without relying on continuous fencing, allowing species like deer to cross freely and maintain migration corridors. This approach supports biodiversity by delineating boundaries between human-occupied zones and wildlife habitats in a non-invasive manner. In urban-rural interfaces, cattle grids help manage animal access at transitional zones, such as park entrances and nature reserves adjacent to developed areas. They are employed to curb unwanted incursions by livestock or feral animals into suburban or recreational spaces, ensuring safety for both humans and wildlife. A notable application occurs in Singapore's Zhenghua Nature Park, where cattle grids with gaps designed to trap boar hooves prevent wild boars from entering urban trails while permitting pedestrian and cyclist passage. Such installations balance accessibility with containment, particularly in scenic or protected routes near population centers. Beyond conservation, cattle grids find application in various non-agricultural sectors for perimeter and . In industrial settings, they secure boundaries against roaming animals without impeding . Similarly, they are used along corridors to deter from tracks, enhancing operational in regions with high animal densities. Emerging technologies, including virtual fencing systems, are gaining traction in eco-tourism areas to reduce the visual and environmental footprint of traditional installations. These systems employ GPS-enabled collars on livestock, delivering auditory or mild electrical cues to enforce invisible boundaries, thus preserving the aesthetic integrity of natural landscapes. In the UK's Mendip Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, virtual fencing has been trialed for grazing management, allowing cattle to roam designated zones without physical barriers that could disrupt tourism or wildlife viewing. This innovation supports sustainable land use in sensitive areas by minimizing habitat fragmentation. A key challenge in these non-agricultural contexts is adapting grid designs to species-specific needs, as depends on factors like , body , and . Standard optimized for may fail to deter smaller or allow unintended crossings, necessitating narrower gaps or alternative configurations for ungulates like deer or smaller mammals. For instance, exclusion tailored for specific ungulates that conservation goals are met without broadly impeding .

Design Variations

Concrete Grids

Concrete cattle grids represent a durable variation designed for long-term installation in areas with frequent vehicle traffic, such as rural roads and farm entrances, where permanence is prioritized over portability. These structures typically consist of poured or precast concrete slabs with embedded steel reinforcements to form parallel bars over a shallow pit, creating an optical illusion that deters livestock from crossing while allowing vehicles to pass unimpeded. Construction of concrete cattle grids can involve either precast units manufactured off-site or site-poured slabs, with bars molded directly into the concrete using steel rods or mesh for reinforcement. The process begins with excavating a pit, lining its base and sides with concrete to prevent soil erosion and ensure stability, then placing the grid sections, which are secured with sealant or additional concrete before backfilling around the edges. Precast options facilitate quicker assembly, often in modular sections weighing around 1.4 tonnes each, while site-poured methods allow for custom integration with surrounding infrastructure. These grids boast a typical lifespan of 20 to 50 years, depending on environmental conditions and maintenance. Key advantages of concrete cattle grids include their resistance to weathering, rust, and corrosion, making them suitable for harsh climates without the need for frequent painting or repairs. They require minimal ongoing maintenance—primarily occasional clearing of debris from the pit—and prove cost-effective over time, with installation costs generally ranging from $1,500 to $3,000 for standard units, offset by their longevity and ability to support heavy loads like tractors. This design is particularly ideal for fixed installations on rural roadways, where it enhances biosecurity by minimizing human-livestock contact. Standard specifications for concrete cattle grids feature bar spacing of 4 to 6 inches to effectively discourage livestock passage, with pit depths typically ranging from 8 to 18 inches (200 to 450 mm), though deeper excavations up to 18 inches may be used in high-risk areas for added deterrence. These grids are engineered to Australian Standards such as AS 5100.2 or equivalent UK highway guidelines, often certified for 20-tonne axle loads, and are commonly deployed on highways and access points in the UK and Australia. Despite their robustness, concrete cattle grids have unique drawbacks, including their substantial weight—which can exceed several tonnes per section—making relocation difficult and often requiring heavy machinery for any adjustments. In regions prone to freeze-thaw cycles, the material is susceptible to cracking and spalling as water infiltrates pores, freezes, and expands, potentially compromising structural integrity over time.

Steel Grids

Steel cattle grids, also known as steel cattle guards, became a dominant design in the early 20th century, particularly from the 1920s onward, as farms increasingly required durable barriers for vehicle access on livestock properties. These grids typically consist of welded or bolted steel bars mounted over a supporting frame, with galvanization applied to enhance rust resistance and extend service life in outdoor environments. Construction involves modular panels, often measuring around 10 by 12 feet, which are bolted into position over a excavated pit for straightforward assembly. The bars, usually 1 to 2 inches thick and made from steel pipe or I-beams, are spaced 4 to 7 inches apart to deter livestock crossing while permitting vehicle passage; the pit, typically 12 to 16 inches deep, is frequently filled with gravel to facilitate drainage and stability. Key advantages include exceptional load-bearing capacity, rated up to HS-20 standards (approximately 32,000 pounds per or 20 tons total vehicle ), making them suitable for heavy . Their modular allows easy transportation by and relatively simple on-site installation, with costs typically ranging from $2,500 to $4,000 for standard units, rendering them ideal for temporary setups or high-mobility operations. Specifications often feature flat or rounded bars to minimize tire wear and improve vehicle comfort, with common dimensions spanning 12 to 16 feet in width and 6 to 8 feet in length to match standard roadways. These designs are prevalent on U.S. ranches for controlling cattle movement and in South African farms, where they support extensive livestock operations alongside game reserves. Unique considerations for steel grids include the need for periodic inspections to detect and address corrosion, particularly in humid or salted-road environments, despite galvanization. At end-of-life, the steel components are fully recyclable, contributing to sustainable farm infrastructure practices.

Virtual Grids

Virtual grids, also known as painted or optical cattle grids, consist of alternating stripes painted on solid surfaces to mimic the appearance of traditional physical grids, deterring livestock through visual illusion rather than a physical barrier. These low-cost alternatives emerged as practical solutions for budget-conscious areas, particularly on paved highways in the United States, where they replace expensive steel installations by exploiting cattle's aversion to high-contrast patterns that suggest instability or a drop. Unlike concrete or steel grids, virtual grids require no excavation or structural components, relying instead on the animal's perception of depth and shadows created by the stripes. Design typically involves painting eight or more alternating black and white stripes, each approximately 6 inches wide, across asphalt or roadways to simulate bars and gaps. This leverages cattle's sensitivity to light-dark contrasts, similar to how in handling facilities cause balking , without needing a pit or any mechanical elements. Installation is straightforward, often using standard road marking , and can incorporate wooden end-barriers painted with reflectors to enhance the and connect to adjacent . These designs are most suitable for low-traffic areas, such as rural paths or access roads, where physical grids would be impractical or overly costly. The primary advantages of virtual grids include their low cost—estimated at a fraction of physical grids due to minimal materials—and ease of application, requiring no ongoing maintenance beyond occasional repainting. They prove effective for containing cattle accustomed to real grids, as the optical cues trigger the same avoidance response, making them viable for applications like Oregon highways and similar rural routes. However, their success depends on livestock vision and prior exposure; they are less reliable in low-light conditions where contrasts diminish, and they fail against color-blind species such as deer, which do not perceive the illusion as a barrier.

Electric Grids

Electric cattle grids, also referred to as electric cattle guards, function as an active livestock barrier by integrating the structural elements of conventional grids with an electrical component to deliver a mild shock upon contact, thereby reinforcing deterrence through learned aversion. These systems emerged as a hybrid approach combining traditional grid designs with electric fencing principles, with documented innovations appearing in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, such as the flexible mat-based design patented in 2003 following a 2000 filing. This variant addresses scenarios where passive visual barriers alone prove insufficient, particularly for more agile or persistent animals, by providing an additional sensory cue via intermittent electrical pulses. In terms of design, electric grids typically feature bars or rubber mats arranged in a standard grid over a shallow pit or flush with the ground surface, with conductive wiring integrated into the elements to transmit the shock. The bars or mats maintain conventional spacing of approximately 4 inches to exploit livestock's instinctual of uneven footing, while being connected to an electric fence that generates high-voltage, low-amperage pulses—often 2,000 to 4,000 volts delivered in short bursts of about 150 microseconds at one-second intervals. are commonly solar- or battery-powered for versatility in off-grid locations, with output capacities ranging from 2 to 5 joules to power the system effectively across moderate distances. For instance, one patented configuration employs dual-layered polychloroprene rubber mats, where the upper conductive layer incorporates carbon black particles to ensure reliable contact-based shocking without impeding vehicle passage. Key advantages of electric grids include their portability for temporary fencing applications, such as rotational grazing, and their cost-effectiveness relative to permanent installations, with basic DIY constructions achievable for under $75 excluding wiring, compared to over $3,500 for standard metal units. They demonstrate strong reliability in containing livestock by preventing unauthorized crossings without constant human intervention, as evidenced by field reports where herds remain confined without incident. These grids are especially suited for stubborn species like goats, where the electrical element provides a more robust psychological barrier than visual cues alone. Specifications adhere to animal welfare guidelines, limiting each pulse to under 1 joule of energy to avoid injury while ensuring efficacy, and systems routinely incorporate warning signage to alert humans to the hazard. Additionally, they serve as an effective supplementary measure alongside passive grids in mixed-use environments. For context, electric grids often prove more economical upfront than virtual fencing alternatives, which can exceed $7,000 per mile including collars.

Effectiveness

On Livestock

Cattle grids demonstrate high effectiveness in containing domestic such as and , often exceeding 95% under standard designs when properly installed and maintained. This is closely linked to bar spacing tailored to dimensions, typically 4 to 6 inches for bovines, which traps the hoof between bars and exploits the animals' limited to induce avoidance. Effectiveness varies by species, with lower rates reported for sheep and goats due to their smaller, more agile hooves that can navigate the gaps more readily. Horses typically respect the grid but may attempt to jump it if strongly motivated, such as by herd pressure or access to feed. Key factors influencing containment include animal age and prior exposure, with calves acquiring avoidance behaviors more rapidly through observation of adults, while untrained mature stock may test the grid initially. Deeper pits exceeding 1 meter amplify the deterrent effect by heightening the perceived risk of injury. Maintenance plays a vital role, as clean, visible bars prevent habituation and ensure the optical illusion remains intact; debris accumulation can diminish efficacy. Field studies on U.S. ranches, including implementations by the U.S. Service and , report very low crossing rates for cattle in well-designed systems, consistent with at least a 95% reduction in crossings. Broader agricultural surveys indicate cattle grids substantially reduce overall livestock escapes compared to ungated boundaries. Design enhancements like angled ramps or flank extensions can improve one-way deterrence, permitting livestock to exit an area while discouraging re-entry.

On Wildlife

Cattle grids demonstrate moderate to high effectiveness in containing large ungulates such as deer and , with studies reporting reductions in crossings exceeding 88% for and over 80% for when using simulated grids with electrified elements, and greater than 95% for under similar conditions. Optimal designs incorporate flat bars spaced appropriately and widths of around 14 feet to deter crossing attempts by exploiting animals' aversion to visual gaps. In contrast, effectiveness diminishes significantly for small mammals, as and similar species can often navigate the gaps between bars or traverse the structure without hesitation, though some designs pose entrapment risks in the underlying pits. While intended to manage access, cattle grids can act as unintended barriers that fragment wildlife habitats by obstructing migration corridors, particularly in areas where they intersect natural pathways. Research on ungulate populations, including elk in the United States, indicates that such linear barriers contribute to reduced gene flow by limiting dispersal and interbreeding between herds, exacerbating isolation in fragmented landscapes. For instance, studies in western U.S. ecosystems highlight how barriers like grids and associated fencing hinder connectivity, leading to lower genetic diversity in isolated elk groups. Certain wildlife species exhibit adaptations that allow them to bypass cattle grids more readily than larger ungulates. Birds remain largely unaffected, as they can fly over the structures without impediment, while amphibians often cross unimpeded due to their small size and ability to navigate shallow gaps or surrounding terrain. Canids such as coyotes and foxes frequently circumvent grids by jumping across narrower sections or digging under the perimeter fencing, behaviors that reduce the barriers' overall containment efficacy for these predators. To address these ecological drawbacks, mitigation strategies have evolved to incorporate wildlife-friendly designs, including escape ramps adjacent to grids that allow trapped animals to climb out and overpasses that provide alternative crossing points without fragmenting habitats. Post-2020 research underscores the importance of these adaptations in conservation areas, emphasizing their role in preserving biodiversity by minimizing impacts on migration and gene flow while integrating with broader fencing systems. Globally, grids have been applied to manage populations with varying ecological benefits. In the UK's moorlands, such as , grids have effectively reduced incursions by ponies into adjacent areas, helping maintain traditional patterns and . In , modified "koala grids" installed along roadways indirectly koala by deterring from crossing high-traffic zones, thereby lowering collision rates and supporting in fragmented habitats.

Limitations and Risks

Behavioral and Structural Limitations

Livestock may habituate to cattle grids over time, particularly if they observe vehicles or other animals crossing without issue, leading to occasional attempts to traverse the structure. This behavioral adaptation is more pronounced in motivated herds, where animals are driven by factors such as access to food, water, or mates on the opposite side. Young calves and injured livestock are especially prone to testing the grid, as their reduced caution or physical constraints make them less deterred by the visual illusion of danger. Structural flaws can compromise the grid's reliability, with debris such as dirt, leaves, and stones accumulating in the pit and filling gaps between bars, thereby diminishing the visual depth that creates the deterrence effect. Shallow pit designs, typically less than 0.5 m deep, allow more confident animals to step across, as the perceived risk of falling is minimized. Over time, repeated vehicle traffic causes wear on the bars, gradually widening the spacing and reducing the grid's ability to prevent crossings after 20-30 years without significant maintenance. Certain species exhibit vulnerabilities that exacerbate these limitations; goats and sheep often climb the edges or bars due to their , rendering standard grids ineffective for containing them without additional . In mixed herds, these species-specific tendencies contribute to higher overall circumvention rates compared to uniform cattle groups. Environmental factors further impair functionality, as snow and can fill the gaps and pit, creating a solid surface that eliminates the optical and physical barriers, significantly reducing or eliminating the grid's in winter conditions. Poor , such as during or in shaded areas, reduces the visual contrast of the bars and pit, weakening the psychological deterrence that relies on the animal's of instability and depth.

Safety and Environmental Risks

Cattle grids pose several risks to animals, including hoof entrapment in the gaps between bars or falls into the underlying pits, which can lead to severe injuries or death. Horses are particularly vulnerable, with reports of leg fractures occurring when limbs become trapped in steel grates during attempts to cross or escape. To mitigate such incidents, animal welfare guidelines emphasize the use of rounded or beveled bar edges, which reduce the likelihood of hooves catching and promote safer passage for non-target species. For humans, cattle grids present hazards such as tire damage from uneven or sharp edges, which can puncture or wear vehicle tires during crossings, especially on high-speed roads. Pedestrians face slip risks on the grated surfaces, particularly in wet conditions, necessitating caution for cyclists and walkers. Regulatory standards often mandate warning signage, such as "Caution: Cattle Grid" notices, to alert drivers and reduce accident potential. Environmentally, the installation of grids involves excavation that can cause soil compaction around the site, disrupting local soil structure and microbial activity. This process also alters natural water runoff patterns by creating pits that channel or impede drainage, potentially leading to localized erosion or flooding. Vehicle crossings generate significant noise, with levels varying widely but reaching peaks that disturb nearby residents; a 2017 study documented this disturbance to residents from repetitive sounds. Broader ecological concerns include habitat fragmentation for small species, as the pits and barriers act as traps for small mammals, amphibians, and reptiles, isolating populations and increasing mortality risks. Post-2020 assessments have raised issues regarding the carbon footprint of concrete-based grids, given that cement production accounts for approximately 7-8% of global CO2 emissions as of 2024, contributing to climate impacts from infrastructure deployment. Mitigation strategies include regular cleaning to remove debris that could exacerbate entrapment or slippage, as well as the addition of wildlife ramps adjacent to grids to allow safe passage for non-target species. Global regulations increasingly limit cattle grid use in sensitive ecological areas, prioritizing alternatives like fencing to minimize habitat disruption.

Patents and Standards

Key Patents

The earliest United States patent for a basic steel grid design was granted on January 19, 1915, to William J. Hickey of Reno, Nevada, under US Patent 1,125,095, which described a series of parallel bars over a pit to deter livestock from crossing roadways while permitting vehicle passage. Key developments in the 1920s focused on enhanced structural integrations, exemplified by US Patent 1,478,927 issued to William Andrew Tomlinson of Ironwood, Michigan, on December 25, 1923, featuring a reinforced bar arrangement for improved stability and livestock deterrence. Electric variants emerged later, with an influential design patented in Illinois in 1955 that incorporated electrified elements to enhance containment without physical barriers, as documented in historical analyses of livestock management innovations. By the 1980s, further advancements included portable electric systems, though basic configurations had largely entered the public domain post-1950s expiration periods. Influential international patents adapted cattle grids to regional needs, including Australian filings for durable outback designs suited to harsh terrains, such as reinforced steel variants for remote pastoral properties. Modern innovations encompass virtual grids relying on optical illusions, such as painted stripe systems mimicking physical gaps to psychologically deter animals without excavation; experiments have shown cattle avoiding such painted grids similarly to real ones. Patent trends emphasize durability enhancements like corrosion-resistant materials and animal welfare features such as rounded bars to minimize , reflecting a shift from rudimentary to multifunctional systems. Basic designs from the early have entered the , enabling widespread replication. These patents significantly spurred , facilitating broader in and .

Regulatory Standards

In the , grids installed on roads must comply with guidelines from the American Association of and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), which require a minimum HS-20 load rating to support heavy vehicular , equivalent to a 32,000-pound . This standard ensures structural under dynamic loads, with bar spacing typically recommended at 4 to 6 inches to effectively deter passage while allowing vehicle tires to cross unimpeded. State departments of transportation may impose additional variations, such as specific width requirements or materials for highway applications, to address local traffic and environmental conditions. In the United Kingdom, the British Standard BS 4008:2006 outlines requirements for cattle grid design, including minimum dimensions (such as a 130 mm gap between bars), suitable materials like galvanized steel for corrosion resistance, and load-testing protocols to verify containment of livestock while permitting vehicle passage. This standard remains the primary reference for construction and installation, with compliance verified through proof-loading tests that simulate heavy agricultural or road vehicles. Australia applies AS 3996:2019 for access covers and , classifying grids by load capacity (e.g., Class B for light at 80 kN or Class D for heavy at 210 kN) based on installation and expected , ensuring in rural settings. In New Zealand, the Gates and Cattlestops Order 1955 mandates that cattlestops support at least 1.25 times the maximum weight of using the road, with additional guidelines in practice notes for infrastructure emphasizing secure installation to prevent stock escape. Emerging international efforts, such as those under ISO technical committees, are exploring standardized designs for wildlife-permeable grids, but no finalized draft specific to cattle grids was adopted by 2024. Compliance with these standards generally requires proper installation, including mandatory wing fencing or barriers around the pit to prevent accidental falls, particularly on public roads, and regular inspections to check for structural wear or debris accumulation. Post-2020 regulatory updates in various jurisdictions have incorporated environmental considerations, such as noise reduction in grid designs and mitigation of soil erosion from pits, to align with broader sustainability goals. Enforcement varies by region; in the US, non-compliance with load standards on federal or state roads is handled through departments of transportation, while certification for installations on federal lands may involve USDA oversight for range improvements.

References

  1. https://www.texasmonthly.com/being-texan/texas-primer-the-cattle-guard/
  2. https://kansaspress.ku.edu/9780700631568/
  3. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/cattle-grid
  4. https://www.dit.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/272567/DOCS_AND_FILES-10707418-v1-Stock_Grids_on_Roads_-_operational_instruction_OI_20_28.PDF
  5. https://teara.govt.nz/en/photograph/15315/cattle-stop
  6. https://www.barnworld.com/cattle-guard/what-is-the-best-spacing-for-bars-in-cattle-guards-from-installation-kits/
  7. https://cattlegrids.com/technical-data/frequently-asked-questions/
  8. https://www.barnworld.com/cattle-guard/what-are-the-dimensions-of-a-standard-cattle-guard/
  9. https://www.oed.com/dictionary/cattle-guard_n
  10. https://plainshumanities.unl.edu/encyclopedia/doc/egp.fol.005.html
  11. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18085928/
  12. https://www.barnworld.com/cattle-guard/what-is-the-optimal-spacing-for-cattle-guards-on-private-roads/
  13. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=acwp_faafp
  14. https://www.barnworld.com/cattle-guard/understanding-the-mechanics-of-cattle-guards-how-do-they-work/
  15. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1614&context=icwdm_usdanwrc
  16. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1800&context=icwdm_usdanwrc
  17. https://www.facebook.com/groups/381688085599512/permalink/2275530076215294/
  18. https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1950/may/02/highways-provision-of-cattle-grids-bill
  19. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5ba3bb0eed915d2ba755b4d6/report.pdf
  20. https://www.wa.gov.au/system/files/2022-10/Thematic_History_of_WA.pdf
  21. https://www.resourceafrica.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Rural_development_and_the_role_of_game_f.pdf
  22. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/585911/IPOL_STU%282017%29585911_EN.pdf
  23. https://www.esa.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/IIE_24-Rural-Roads.pdf
  24. https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/PATRS-005-En.pdf
  25. https://emag.directindustry.com/2025/10/17/livestock-farmers-virtual-fencing-technology-app-cattle/
  26. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479725011429
  27. https://plainshumanities.unl.edu/encyclopedia/doc/egp.fol.005
  28. https://www.grahamsprecast.com.au/everything-you-need-to-know-about-cattle-grids
  29. https://www.barnworld.com/cattle-guard/cattle-guard-placement-strategies-for-optimal-ranch-management/
  30. https://dallcon.com.au/everything-you-need-to-know-about-cattle-grids/
  31. https://www.agriculture.gov.au/sites/default/files/sitecollectiondocuments/forestry/newsletter-edition16.pdf
  32. https://regionalruralfinance.com.au/cattle-grids/
  33. https://www.barnworld.com/cattle-guard/how-much-does-a-cattle-guard-cost/
  34. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Typical-cattle-grid-in-Dartmoor-National-Park-at-Dartmeet_fig7_288626477
  35. https://www.barnworld.com/cattle-guard/enhancing-wildlife-conservation-through-cattle-guard-installation/
  36. https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/wild-boars-bukit-panjang-attacks-fences-cattle-grids-zhenghua-nature-park-3582836
  37. https://cobro.co.za/2025/01/01/concrete-cattle-grids-a-practical-guide/
  38. https://www.financialexpress.com/business/railways-indian-railways-develops-special-metal-fencing-to-combat-cattle-on-tracks-menace-3624657/
  39. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz937ppv2g5o
  40. https://www.nature.org/en-us/what-we-do/our-priorities/provide-food-and-water-sustainably/food-and-water-stories/virtual-fencing-research-conservation-tool/
  41. https://www.barnworld.com/cattle-guard/can-cattle-guards-be-effective-for-other-animals-besides-cattle/
  42. https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2594
  43. https://www.barnworld.com/cattle-guard/what-are-the-benefits-of-concrete-cattle-guards/
  44. https://civilmart.com.au/blog/cattle-grid-designs-specifications/
  45. https://www.vikonprecast.com.au/agricultural-precast-concrete-products/cattle-grids
  46. https://www.vtci.com.au/cattle-grids
  47. https://www.barnworld.com/cattle-guard/what-are-common-issues-with-cattle-guards-in-different-seasons/
  48. https://www.nitterhousemasonry.com/blog/what-is-freeze-thaw/
  49. http://www.dot.minnesota.gov/culturalresources/docs/crunit/elementsae.pdf
  50. https://cdn.saffire.com/files.ashx?t=fg&rid=SARodeo&f=Designing_and_Building_Cattle_Guards_R20%281%29.pdf
  51. https://www.barnworld.com/cattle-guard/exploring-different-materials-used-in-cattle-guard-construction/
  52. https://www.fs.usda.gov/pnw/pubs/pnw_gtr250.pdf
  53. https://farmandranchdepot.com/how-do-cattle-guards-work-/
  54. https://universitylands.utsystem.edu/Content/Images/Operations/CattleGuardDetail_8X16.pdf
  55. https://www.farmersweekly.co.za/archive/townie-cattle-grids/
  56. https://www.iowabeefcenter.org/bch/HandlingFacility.pdf
  57. https://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/docs/NCHRP25-25%252884%2529_FR.pdf
  58. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/219380850.pdf
  59. https://patents.google.com/patent/US6519131B1/en
  60. https://www.noble.org/regenerative-agriculture/livestock/electric-cattle-guard-saves-time/
  61. https://am.gallagher.com/-/media/Bynder/Animal-Management/Document/All-GGL-Manuals/Electric-Fencing-101-Manual-NA-original.pdf
  62. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/farming-natural-resources-and-industry/agriculture-and-seafood/farm-management/structures-and-mechanization/300-series/307310-1_electric_fence_controllers.pdf
  63. https://farmranchstore.com/collections/cattle-guards
  64. https://talk.newagtalk.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=655040&DisplayType=flat&setCookie=1
  65. https://www.bigredfencing.com.au/what-are-electric-fence-volts-and-joules/
  66. https://agtech.folio3.com/blogs/virtual-fencing-for-cattle-cost-comparison/
  67. https://apps.azdot.gov/files/ADOTLibrary/publications/project_reports/pdf/az612.pdf
  68. https://www.fs.usda.gov/t-d/pubs/pdfpubs/pdf98232826/pdf98232826pt01.pdf
  69. https://www.barnworld.com/cattle-guard/can-cattle-guards-be-used-for-horses-and-other-livestock/
  70. https://repository.upenn.edu/bitstreams/4562f9aa-275b-4f50-8ab9-801df4660aa2/download
  71. https://www.barnworld.com/cattle-guard/common-misconceptions-about-cattle-guards-debunked/
  72. https://www.ugpti.org/resources/reports/downloads/mpc15-297-brief.pdf
  73. https://journal.wildlife.ca.gov/2025/05/20/observations-of-wildlife-entrapment-in-cattle-guards-with-special-consideration-for-special-status-herpetofauna/
  74. https://www.biodiversityinfrastructure.org/handbook/5-solutions/5-2-fencing/5-2-8-cattle-grids-and-gates/
  75. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/299f/563d8a357d0321913171acc6c1f878e3c714.pdf
  76. https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecs2.3781
  77. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/clas/ctip/wildlife_crossing_structures/appendices.aspx
  78. https://largelandscapes.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/WILDLIFE-CROSSING-SUCCESS-STORIES-IN-THE-WESTERN-STATES.pdf
  79. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9753749/
  80. https://www.cowgirlmagazine.com/exmoor-pony/
  81. https://friendsofthekoala.org/how-cattle-grids-can-stop-our-koalas-dying-on-the-highway/
  82. https://www.cattlegridguru.co.uk/faq/
  83. https://greatcattleguards.wordpress.com/
  84. https://www.barnworld.com/cattle-guard/how-do-vehicle-weights-impact-cattle-guards-over-time/
  85. https://www.barnworld.com/cattle-guard/how-long-does-a-cattle-guard-typically-last/
  86. https://www.barnworld.com/cattle-guard/are-cattle-guards-safe-for-wildlife-and-pets/
  87. https://www.barnworld.com/cattle-guard/how-to-handle-snow-and-ice-accumulation-on-cattle-guards/
  88. https://www.barnworld.com/cattle-guard/how-do-weather-conditions-affect-cattle-guard-efficiency/
  89. https://www.fas.scot/article/cattle-shed-lighting/
  90. https://horsesidevetguide.com/drv/Observation/1270/accident-hoof-or-limb-trapped-in-steel-grate-cattle-guard/
  91. https://www.barnworld.com/cattle-guard/what-safety-features-should-be-included-in-cattle-guard-design/
  92. https://www.creativesafetysupply.com/caution-cattle-grid-with-hazard-icon-portrait-wall-sign/
  93. https://www.miteco.gob.es/content/dam/miteco/es/biodiversidad/temas/ecosistemas-y-conectividad/newsletter_FH_T_n11_tcm30-195826.pdf
  94. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312597198_Investigation_of_noise_and_disturbance_from_vehicles_crossing_cattle_grids
  95. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2024/09/cement-production-sustainable-concrete-co2-emissions/
  96. https://patents.google.com/patent/US1125095A/en
  97. https://patents.google.com/patent/US1478927A/en
  98. https://www.sheldrake.org/research/morphic-resonance/cattle-fooled-by-phoney-grids
  99. https://www.barnworld.com/cattle-guard/what-load-rating-is-required-for-cattle-guards-on-public-roads/
  100. https://www.mdt.mt.gov/other/webdata/external/const/detailed_drawings/2024/611-Cattle-Guards.pdf
  101. https://mcveighparker.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/VNo.1-2020-26-Tonne-Cattle-Grids.pdf
  102. https://www.buda.com.au/blogs/news/load-ratings
  103. https://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/1955/0067/latest/whole.html
  104. https://www.barnworld.com/cattle-guard/what-are-the-legal-requirements-for-cattle-guards/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.