A little info for Wyoming

zerg901

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
3,236
from a 2020 federal document found online vs RRDB

Bridger Teton Natl Forest also has 171.575 R - 164.175 input with sites at Cottonwood Mtn, Sage Mtn, Pow Wow, and Rosie's Ridge - (maybe for Idaho areas? - just guessing why it is not listed in the RRDB)

Shoshone Natl Forest - 172.325 R is used by the 'Clarks Fork / Washakie' area

Shoshone Natl Forest - 168.675 is listed as "R2 Tac" - ( and their "Timber" channel is listed as 151.925 - its in the channel load - and yup thats the business band afaik )

Shoshone NF - shows 169.95 R - 165.225 input as "R2 SOA Repeater" with a note stating that PL varies by Forests - in addition - 169.95 simplex PL 110.9 shows as 'SOA SHF'
 

W3DMV

Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
631
Location
Gettysburg, Pa
The DB info is submitted by listener's like you and I. You can submit your info by going to
the database page and click on "Submit Info" at the top right of the page. If it's not listed, nobody
has submitted the information.
 

es93546

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 18, 2020
Messages
198
Location
East of the Sierra Crest-Right Side on Map of CA
from a 2020 federal document found online vs RRDB

Bridger Teton Natl Forest also has 171.575 R - 164.175 input with sites at Cottonwood Mtn, Sage Mtn, Pow Wow, and Rosie's Ridge - (maybe for Idaho areas? - just guessing why it is not listed in the RRDB)

Shoshone Natl Forest - 172.325 R is used by the 'Clarks Fork / Washakie' area

Shoshone Natl Forest - 168.675 is listed as "R2 Tac" - ( and their "Timber" channel is listed as 151.925 - its in the channel load - and yup thats the business band afaik )

Shoshone NF - shows 169.95 R - 165.225 input as "R2 SOA Repeater" with a note stating that PL varies by Forests - in addition - 169.95 simplex PL 110.9 shows as 'SOA SHF'
That "timber" channel is likely used by the Forest Service to speak directly to timber sale operators, most often to check in with the drivers of logging trucks when USFS employees are driving harvest roads. Quite often, the installation of CB radios in federal vehicles is given a local authorization for the same reason. If not an actual authorization, local management would not raise an issue about it as they know it added some margin of safety for employees. Sometimes it helped to locate timber sale supervisors and eliminate driving all over the place to find them. Otherwise CB radio and federal agencies are very much allergic to each other. A letter of frequency use authorization is required from FCC license holders to put a non federal frequency in a federal radio. I had a large cross country ski area frequency in all my front country recreation radios as my employees and I patrolled the area frequently. I also had the local water/sewage district's frequency in my radios as we had to interface with them every once in a while. A few of us had a ham radio frequency or frequencies programmed into our mobiles and handhelds. They could come in handy when hams were at some repeater sites and could be asked to take a quick look at antennas and coax of ours. Sometimes they could be useful in SAR situations.

The problem with only taking verified info for listing frequencies on the RRDB is that how are people supposed to know what frequencies to listen to so they can verify them? The number of people who will see what has been posted here, plug those into a scanner and actually get back on RR to verify their use in a small percentage, especially in Wyoming. I know of some things listed in the DB that haven't been used in 20 years. That and some DB administrators refuse to list agencies accurately or don't know enough about them to understand how they should be listed.

I will have to dig around and see if I have the document you have found.
 

ecps92

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2002
Messages
11,591
Location
Taxachusetts
Since "HE" has not actually heard those in use, nor would he, from 617 it will require someone LOCAL to OTA validate the information
The DB info is submitted by listener's like you and I. You can submit your info by going to
the database page and click on "Submit Info" at the top right of the page. If it's not listed, nobody
has submitted the information.
 

edweirdFL

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
443
Location
Daytona Beach, FL
The problem with only taking verified info for listing frequencies on the RRDB is that how are people supposed to know what frequencies to listen to so they can verify them?
IMHO I think this is where the Wiki for that part of the database is pretty handy. Since you can put unidentified and unverified info in the Wiki, I'd think an entry of that info and asking any one who can verify it would be appropriate.

When using the database, if you don't see what you are looking for, don't forget to check the corresponding Wiki page (if it exists). You might just see some things that folks in the area are working on verifying, or maybe a request for folks in the area to try and check something out.

I know some will say that the forums are/can be used for this, but the rate at which things can get pushed back beyond the first couple of pages, or be locked for replies makes the Wiki a better choice for this in the longer run, again in my opinion.
 

es93546

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 18, 2020
Messages
198
Location
East of the Sierra Crest-Right Side on Map of CA
I dug around in my files and notebooks and found a few things. I did find a document that is likely to be the same as what you are looking at. Here are my observations.

The 171.5750/164.1750 pair is the "River Net" on the Bridger-Teton NF. There is one group in the 16 group BK radio program titled "River Crew" and that net is listed there. The River Net also shows up on the BTF's first two groups, both of which are admin groups, not fire specific. However, all the listings show it on the Pow Wow repeater only. The other repeater locations make sense though, with Rosie's Ridge providing coverage for the Gros Ventre River, the Sage Mtn. repeater looks like it might cover the Grey's River and the Cottonwood Mtn. covering the Green River. Cottonwood doesn't make much sense for the Green River though as only the upper stretches of that river are on the forest where it would seem like the repeaters on Pinion Ridge and Bacon Ridge are closer. The Cottonwood repeater is located between the BTF's Wind River and Wyoming ranges in what appears to be a large area of private and BLM land, but probably provides good coverage for the lower slopes of those ranges that might be in the shadows of higher repeaters. I know of one other national forest with a dedicated "River Net" and that is the Salmon-Challis. It covers the famous "Middle Fork" run of the Salmon River and the Middle Fork Ranger District with 3 repeaters.

As a funny aside, I couldn't pronounce "Gros Ventre" when I was young and in my mind I thought it was "Gross Venture," ha, ha. It is actually pronounced "grow Vaunt." It is obviously French, just like the name "Teton." "Gros Ventre" is a much more unattractive word, that sounds kind of grand and romantic if you don't speak French, but it isn't at all. It means "big belly" in French. I'll continue to think "Grand Teton" sounds great, but "Gros Ventre" makes me think about a bunch of guys at home watching football on a big screen while drinking beer and slamming down Fritos and spicy bean dip.

Here are the repeaters for the forest:

170.5000/164.1000 North Zone Net. Appears to be used by the Clarks Fork (RD#1), Greybull (RD#2) and Wapiti (RD#4) Ranger Districts. These 3 districts are currently administered by one district ranger.

172.3250/164.8250 Clarks Fork/Washakie Net. I don't know why the forest labels it with "Clarks Fork" as it is really the south net for the Washakie (RD#3) Ranger District according to the repeater locations listed for it. If they assign nets based on location like the North Zone, this could also be labeled the South Zone Net.

172.3750/164.8750 Wind River Net. This is used by the Wind River (RD#5) Ranger District. This could also be labeled as the Central Zone Net.

168.675 R2 Tac. This is listed the same way on several Region 2 (Rocky Mountain) frequency lists. I think it is safe to say this is the R2 tac. Regions have to assign nets for a region to eliminate use of the NIFC tacs on initial attack incidents. Regions 1 (Northern ), 2 (Rocky Mountain) , 3 (Southwestern), 4 (Intermountain) and 5 (Pacific Southwest) all have regional tacs, with regions 3, 4 and 5 having at least 3 regional tacticals. Regions 8 (Southern) and 9 (Eastern) share one tactical frequency.

169.9500 simplex with a 110.9 tone is labeled "SOA SHF." This is listed in the Shoshone NF Group 13 "National Homeland Security." The addition of "SHF" could be inferred that this is not a regional SOA, but unique to the Shoshone. It can also be inferred as a regional net where the Shoshone is assigned a tone of 110.9 and that other forest have the same frequency with different tones as you mentioned. This is supported by this channel:

169.9500/165.2250 is shown "R2 SOA Repeater (Forest specific tones)." This agrees with your view of other forests using this frequency simplex or for repeaters and then having a tone assigned to each forest. . I've not seen that on other R2 forest frequency lists. I will double check my info for the region to see if I missed it.

168.7500 simplex, no tone, with the label "Shoshone TAC." It shows up more than once in the 16 group list the forest has. It looks like the people on this forest have 3 options for tacticals, the R2 tac, the R2 SOA and the Shoshone NF tac.

The group 13 I mentioned above has the VTACS as well as the VFires 21-26, the two VMeds as wekk as VLaw's 31 and 32. Those are well known.

One final observation, the "Timber" frequency shows a radio display label of "GYPO." A Google search of this in relation to logging defines the term as an independent, small scale, logger. A FCC license search for 151.9250 in Wyoming did not show anyone in logging with a license for the frequency. Somehow it would seem that independent loggers have adopted this as their frequency in the area.

Thanks for your post zerg901, I took a harder look at my Shoshone and Bridger-Teton NF's pages.
 

es93546

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 18, 2020
Messages
198
Location
East of the Sierra Crest-Right Side on Map of CA
IMHO I think this is where the Wiki for that part of the database is pretty handy. Since you can put unidentified and unverified info in the Wiki, I'd think an entry of that info and asking any one who can verify it would be appropriate.

When using the database, if you don't see what you are looking for, don't forget to check the corresponding Wiki page (if it exists). You might just see some things that folks in the area are working on verifying, or maybe a request for folks in the area to try and check something out.

I know some will say that the forums are/can be used for this, but the rate at which things can get pushed back beyond the first couple of pages, or be locked for replies makes the Wiki a better choice for this in the longer run, again in my opinion.
Yes, if you can get most members to look at the Wiki. I think the Wiki needs some reorganization to make it easier to navigate.

What I don't like and I think a friend of mine posted this also, is the RRDB can show a frequency that hasn't been used for years. I have access to quite a bit of official information given I'm retired from the U.S. Forest Service. I don't come across very many errors in the official information. I can count the number I've come across at 5-10 times in a few decades so I think the official info is 95% accurate. Meanwhile the RRDB shows information that is 0% accurate. I understand the point of the policy that on the air monitoring is needed, but to show frequencies we know are no longer valid is the unfortunate result of this policy.

I would love to travel all over the west with some scanners to verify this, but in retirement our funds are very limited. We are another couple that is property rich and cash poor, house paid for long ago, but with limited pensions as both of us had to retire prior to reaching 55 years.

I can write on the Wiki and have put a lot of information and effort into doing so, but the software used for it is very cumbersome and more time consuming than it should or could be. I have a RR member friend who refuses to write anything on it. She says the software is based on hieroglyphics.
 
Top