NEW research which demonstrates that cows and badgers mix together while out in the fields much more than previously thought has rendered Government measures to tackle bovine TB "futile", a farming expert has said.

Campaigners have renewed calls for a targeted cull of badgers, which are widely held responsible for the spread of the infection, after a study by the Scottish Agricultural College (SAC) and the University of York revealed the two animals frequently have contact in fields.

It means that advice from Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) to secure indoor areas where cattle are kept will not help to protect them from the disease.

Researchers believe a more effective method would be to target "high-risk" animals which are more prone to spread infection.

Anthony Gibson, a farming columnist for the Western Morning News, said: "This work shows just how futile it is to try to prevent contact between badgers and cattle in buildings, which is the mantra that Defra preaches to farmers. If cows are frequently having contact with badgers out in the fields, then there's nothing you can do about it."

He said some farmers' efforts to keep badgers out of fields had proved expensive and pointless as they dug their way under fencing. The only solution was to cull infected badgers, he said.

But Defra stressed yesterday that its advice to farmers about bovine TB did not just centre on preventing contact between cattle and badgers in buildings.

A spokesman said the Government website included advice to farmers about the risks they should be aware of at pasture. He added: "It has long been known that there is contact between cattle and badgers at pasture and that it was likely this was frequent.

"However, it has not been easy to record how often this contact occurred (previous studies have been based on observation). We welcome all additions to our evidence base that could inform our understanding of this complex disease."

Bovine TB cost the taxpayer £37 million last year alone, paid out to farmers in compensation for culled cattle.

Previous studies of cattle and badger contact have been carried out through human observation. But, in the latest case, researchers attached electronic monitoring equipment to both cattle and badgers. The devices record close proximity and the number of times the creatures met.

The findings of Dr Mike Hutchings of the SAC's Animal Health Research Group and Dr Piran White of the University of York's environment department are today published in research journal PLoS ONE.

It documents how researchers found that some badgers come into contact with certain cows more regularly than they meet badgers from other setts.

Dr Hutchings said: "The belief that, out in the fields, badgers and cattle avoided each other means we have been neglecting a potentially significant area of disease transmission between the species."

Data also revealed some cattle are more curious than others, making them both more likely to investigate badgers, and then to mingle with other cattle – a potentially fatal combination in the spread of infection.

Dr White said the new information could help improve measures to fight the disease. "Policy is currently against culling so we need ways to reduce disease transmission. This study presents one potential avenue to achieve this, through targeting specific, high-risk animals," he added.

Jilly Greed, vice-chairman of the National Beef Association in the South West, is under restrictions for TB at her family farm in Thorverton, Mid Devon, meaning she cannot sell live cattle.

Signs of TB were found despite the farm following best practice, as laid out by Defra. "It seems all of our good work is a complete waste of time whenever our cows go out to pasture," she said.

"We have even gone to the extremes of erecting electric fencing, and it's massively frustrating to realise you just can't prevent contact between badgers and cows."

She said it had long been known that dominant cows, bulls and tame family pets were more likely to contract the disease, fitting with the scientists' view that curious creatures had more contact.

Environment Secretary Hilary Benn yesterday defended his decision not to order a badger cull, saying he understood the frustration in the farming community.

He told the WMN: "I went with the science. We have tried culling – that's what the Krebs trial did. The evidence was clear – if you cull reactively, you make it worse.

"If you go for a pro-active cull, you can benefit in the area where you are culling but create problems on the outside.

"I recognise that it was not a popular decision and that's why I put a considerable additional amount of money into vaccine research."

Six areas are expected to be selected for trials of a badger vaccine.

"I am very keen that we work with the farming industry and others to see what impact it has. TB is a terrible disease. I am determined to do everything we can to deal with it."