Can you repeat? Oh, forget it.
By Matthew Chatfield

I am just recovering from a two-day festival for 12,000 local residents. We had to park five thousand cars, shepherd a steam of live bands on and off the two stages, and of course keep the beer and the toilets flowing. However, the moment which I suspect will remain fixed in my memory – and that of many others - was when an acquaintance of mine, nine-and-one-half months pregnant, persuaded us to let her try the bouncy castle. I’m not sure if we laughed more getting her on, or getting her off. The festival went very well, but, although the visitors would never have known, we had a problem.

'Mobile' phoneThe problem was the same one we had last year. What is more, if you work in countryside management my guess is that you, too, have suffered this. That problem is communication. The two-way radios we had borrowed were useless. We already knew that our own ones were useless. The mobile telephones could not be heard over the sound system. In the end, to communicate we resorted to the time honoured method of sending runners – a system considered archaic by the Romans. Surely, we could do better? Whilst wondering about this, I began considering the whole issue of countryside communications.

Not that long ago, mobile telephones were rather big, expensive, and so on. That has now changed, along with digital watches and tamagotchis. Your mobile telephone, we are assured, need be no bigger than a Mars bar. Bizarrely, they can also be cheaper than a Mars bar to buy - although the running costs are higher. Countryside managers now have an interesting choice. Should they go for the more convenient, independent and heavily marketed mobile telephones for their staff? On the other hand, should they rely upon radios, now also cheaper and smaller? Of course, in many countryside services the answer is a combination of both, because the two systems have different qualities. A ranger with a radio

Radio communication, when it works, works very well. It has the advantage of allowing many people to hear a message, and feel in touch, even if they do not need to respond. For countryside workers, this can be particularly useful. As I have previously argued in favour of email, it is the insignificant messages that tend not to get passed on, but which make a worker feel a part of a team. Radio, with its fixed running costs, makes this easy. However, it has some disadvantages. The biggest is the initial cost, which can be very high indeed. However, if a system already exists (and in many large organisations it does), extending it is simple – often merely a case of buying another handset and switching it on. This could eventually lead to another problem, overcrowding. Unlike telephones, if too many people are on one radio channel it becomes hard to use, and more channels cost more money.

The structure of the organisation will also affect the choices made. Radio systems are essentially local, and so if staff are very widely spread, or roam a long way, radios will be little use. Furthermore, a radio is no use to a patrolling warden if there is nobody else on the other end of it. If your organisation has few office-based staff, or you work regular unsocial hours, this can be a problem. It can require a duty listening roster or some understanding spouses! There is, however, one overwhelming advantage for some rural countryside staff. Radios can be used anywhere – if the terrain permits – whereas mobile telephone coverage is generally restricted to populated areas.

Mobile telephones, by comparison, are cheap and easy. The quality of calls is now very good, and often far better than a radio system. Companies are queuing up for the privilege of selling you the best deal. Should you be taking advantage of this? Well, maybe. The handset may be free, but you will pay plenty in call charges and monthly line rental, especially if you make a lot of calls. Admittedly, there are some ‘free calls’ deals, but these can be expensive. You are obliged to sign a contract, which makes it more difficult to get rid of a telephone. You simply turn off a spare radio and put it in the bottom drawer, but an idle telephone is a very expensive luxury. This means that you are likely to buy the very minimum number you can get away with. The average countryside service tends to use a few telephones, and often shares them about. They tend to complement, rather than replace, an existing radio system if one exists. For example, I used to work at a site where we had one telephone between five staff, and about half a dozen radios. The duty ranger carried the telephone, but often found themselves phoning the office to ask them to radio a colleague. It worked well, but really, the telephone became an emergency facility rather than an everyday tool. If radios are available this would still seem to be a sensible way to use the two systems.

Finally, there are some principles that apply to any communications system we might consider. The main one, and particularly important for countryside workers, is the quality of reception. The sort of places where we might need to use such technology is often just the place it will not work – in the bottom of a valley, miles from anywhere, or, in my case, underneath some big pylons. What is more, the reception can vary greatly over very short distances. So test rigorously any system you might consider. You should also be aware that different mobile telephone networks have different coverages, and so if one doesn’t work in your area, another might. The second important thing to consider is the future. The future might be bright in the adverts, but it will soon enough go dark if you cannot continue to pay your bills. Any communications system will be expensive and will continue to require investment. In IT technology changes regularly and new gadgets are usually required – telephones and radios are no exception.

So, what will I do for my festival next year? Well, I have seriously considered more low-tech solutions such as semaphore, and even vaguely thought about cocoa-tins and string. No, just kidding. I suppose we shall have to get more specialised equipment in, and test out a few more widgets. I shall keep you posted. More money, more toys. It’s tough being a Virtual Ranger!

Matthew Chatfield: October 1998
NB: This article was written in 1998. Technology has moved on somewhat since then, but some of the issues have not!

Mastodon