California U.S. Forest Service Wiki Pages Update

[es93546]

Please be advised that I have made a nearly two week effort to edit all the wiki pages for the Forest Service in California. I used the 2021 R5 Frequency Guide. As soon as I receive the 2022 version I will be updating the pages again. I'm going to make an additional effort to identify stations and station numbers for each forest as well. This info is available for just a couple of forests right now and was added by other members. I have enough info to do this for all the forests. I just have to learn the hieroglyphics of setting up tables to show the info.

Anyone with comments about what is good, bad and indifferent about these pages, please add your comments on this thread. I'm not going to provide any information about the law enforcement network at all, so don't ask me to write up the very little I have about that network. In the summary of the Region (5) I've added what I've heard about it and what I'm willing to share about it, but that is as far as I can and am willing to go.

 

[es93546]

P.S. I've made a lot of submissions to the California U.S. Forest Service database pages in the last two weeks also. A wonderful database administrator, mlangeveld, has worked with me to come up with what we think will be a very informative database page for this agency. He is far more willing to take suggestions for this page than anyone previous to him. Again, if you would like to see more or different information there, please post on this thread.

 

[B]

Wonderful work, from you both, thank you very much!

 

[f40ph]

Much appreciated especially with the Federal direction to "attempt to" redact their frequencies over the past several years.

 

[zerg901]

California Public Safety

we have several NF maps here ... we did the best we could with the available info at the time ... engine numbers might be all different now

 

[ko6jw_2]

A comment on the listings for Los Padres:
The text mentions channels 3 and 4 as 170.475 and 172.350 - these are obsolete and have been for some time.
The table of frequencies is correct, however.
No mention is made of the link repeaters on Santa Ynez.
The list of fire stations is incomplete.

In general I appreciate all the efforts that went into this project. Thank you.

 

[es93546]

A comment on the listings for Los Padres:
The text mentions channels 3 and 4 as 170.475 and 172.350 - these are obsolete and have been for some time.
The table of frequencies is correct, however.
No mention is made of the link repeaters on Santa Ynez.
The list of fire stations is incomplete.

In general I appreciate all the efforts that went into this project. Thank you.

I'll look up the reference to Channels 3 & 4, that got by me when I was updating the tables.

I'm not sure what you mean that the link repeaters are not mentioned. As I understand it there is a linked remote base on Santa Ynez. So a 400 MHz transceiver for uplink/downlink, a base station with a net receive and net transmit, both simplex and linked to the 400 MHz transceiver. I've left out any information on the linking systems throughout all the pages. I don't have enough info to list linking systems of each NF, so I'm leaving out the paltry info I have.

I'm going to make an effort trying to figure out how to construct tables for the fire stations. I haven't begun this effort yet. I plan to use the format used for the Cleveland NF and adapting it to NF's with more than 3 ranger districts. Wish me luck as my old and declining brain has to learn the hieroglyphics of the wiki. If I could write this stuff up using Word and then just copying and pasting to the Wiki page this would be simple. I find that when computer techs are in charge of a site, simplicity is rarely reached. Not trying to cut anyone down by saying this, but some of us are good finding the information and some good at setting systems up, but those setting it up often don't think like those who are good at information. That is one reason the info on the wiki is good in some places and years past usefulness in most cases.

 

[es93546]

A comment on the listings for Los Padres:
The text mentions channels 3 and 4 as 170.475 and 172.350 - these are obsolete and have been for some time.
The table of frequencies is correct, however.
No mention is made of the link repeaters on Santa Ynez.
The list of fire stations is incomplete.

In general I appreciate all the efforts that went into this project. Thank you.

I forgot to first say that I thank you for your comments. This is what I need to make the pages as accurate as possible.

 

[es93546]

California Public Safety

we have several NF maps here ... we did the best we could with the available info at the time ... engine numbers might be all different now

I think I have the info I need to construct station number info for each national forest. I don't plan on making a "resources assigned" to each station type of table. I may need to look up some info from you site as I don't think I have every forest's stations figured out yet.

 

[ko6jw_2]

The UHF links are important if you live within range of SY Peak since they repeat traffic from all over the LPNF (mostly). For example, in a recent fire on the Santa Barbara side of the ridge they used the Santa Cruz Island repeater. I can't hear that from my location, but by listening on the link I was able to monitor all the traffic. Unfortunately the links exist only on SY Peak. This info is of no use to listeners who are not within range of that site.

By the way Santa Cruz Island (Diablo Peak) location is perfect to get signals into the coastal canyons. Many agencies and a couple of ham repeaters are located there. LPNF was a late comer, but it vastly improved their coverage along the coast.

In other news, the LP fire station at the Santa Ynez Airport was partially destroyed by a fire last night. Not staffed and no casualties, but heavy damage. SB County Fire struck a second alarm for the call.

 

[Alain]

"By the way Santa Cruz Island (Diablo Peak) location is perfect to get signals into the coastal canyons. Many agencies and a couple of ham repeaters are located there."

I can certainly vouch for that statement. Some years ago, five perhaps, [when propagation was better hi-hi] I would QSO SBARC on their 220 repeater on Santa Cruz Island...with my brick Alinco 220 MHz h/t...on 1 watt...from my QTH. Full copy both ways. Ahh, those were the days, weren't' they?!

 

[ScannerDude244]

I notice in the DB for LPF UHF links I have 417.9875 for forest net and 408.9875 for admin net. Did they change?

 

[rsmith7799]

Just for verification, Frequency 3 is 168.6825 and 4 is 163.7125. I've been putting their list together for the 2022 load. No-one had done anything since 2018. LP just hired a new Tech and I'll be working with him to finalize it soon.

 

[rsmith7799]

So the Service Net is now called FIRE CAMP SERVICE NET. 171.5000/164.8250 OST.

 

[es93546]

Just for verification, Frequency 3 is 168.6825 and 4 is 163.7125. I've been putting their list together for the 2022 load. No-one had done anything since 2018. LP just hired a new Tech and I'll be working with him to finalize it soon.

That is what the 2021 R5 Frequency Guide shows. When I get the 2022 version I will be making any necessary updates.

So the Service Net is now called FIRE CAMP SERVICE NET. 171.5000/164.8250 OST.

However, Service Net is used for more than providing communications between Fire Camp, which is no longer an official term in the ICS, and dispatch. As an example it was used as a command for a fire along the coast on the south end of the Monterey Ranger District last year. Under ICS the terms "Incident Command Post" and "Incident Base" are the proper ones for what used to be, some decades ago now, "Fire Camp." I have found using fire camp in the frequency label confuses people, they don't know why they hear traffic that is distinctly command in content on it. This is common as most forests use it as a command net when they have a major incident(s) and need a repeater net for command. Given that most communications between the ICP and dispatch is usually both on the internet (sometimes with a satellite link) and cell phones, the Service Net is not used for logistical traffic hardly at all anymore.

In the R5 Guide 8 of the 11 forests showing this net in their primary group call it the "Service Net," which is 73%. Maybe it's time the Los Padres, the Modoc and the Six Rivers should change and stop using terms from prior to the implementation of ICS when listing its radio channels!?

 

[es93546]

I notice in the DB for LPF UHF links I have 417.9875 for forest net and 408.9875 for admin net. Did they change?

Those two frequencies are 9 MHz apart so they are a pair. The higher frequency would be the uplink (bases to mountain tops) and the lower frequency is the downlink. Scanner listeners normally want to have at least the downlink, but since the reallocation of the UHF band about 15+ years ago (from a 4 MHz split) the uplink is needed also. The old configurations had the uplink repeated on the downlink, but this is not true anymore, at least on the forests I've monitored since. Having these in a scanner is most useful for someone who lives in the vicinity of dispatch, where distant repeaters are out of range, but if you listen to the downlink you can hear everything the dispatcher is hearing. You have to be close to dispatch to hear the uplink, however.

I'm confused as the database shows 406.3250 for Forest Net and 408.9875 for the Admin Net. Just add 9 MHz to each to figure out the uplink. The table above all the National Forests shows the 415 and 417 MHz uplinks.

 

[es93546]

If enough people want it AND we get more than a few confirmed frequencies I will add links to the wiki. At this point we have one set and that is for the Los Padres. I've written in 2-3 threads that we need identification and confirmation of UHF links and heard nearly nothing in return. They can't just be frequencies, we need to confirm what mountain tops they are on. To do that someone needs to drive to dispatch and check where the little Yagi antennas are aimed. This then can be used to figure out what mountain top(s) or listed repeater site has the remote base(s).

I've shied away from listing them as so many people think that on the ground there is a VHF and a UHF communications system. They will call the UHF a backup system or a law enforcement system. They think UHF mobiles and handhelds are used in the field. They just can't seem to understand what linking is. Some don't understand that sometimes an entire forest is microwave linked, something that we can't monitor. Some forests use both UHF and microwave depending on the location. Some forests use the state microwave backbone and pay a fee to the state, similar to rent. Some forests have reportedly been dropping the arrangements with the state and going back to UHF. In the wiki I tried to provide information in the narrative what type of linking system exists on each forest, when I have any information available.

This is a very tough subject to research and I would bet at least half our members or at least half the regular readers don't understand it. It takes knowledgeable people who then have to drive around a lot on roads, most of which are not very good or steeply climb to a lookout or electronic site. Some of those are gated and can't be driven to, some are well hidden.

 

[es93546]

In the R5 Guide 8 of the 11 forests showing this net in their primary group call it the "Service Net," which is 73%. Maybe it's time the Los Padres, the Modoc and the Six Rivers should change and stop using terms from prior to the implementation of ICS when listing its radio channels!?

I just found a Klamath NF document that lists the Service Net of the Six Rivers NF on one of their frequency groups. They just call it "Service Net" so it looks like the count is now 9 of 12 or 75% in favor of the label for this net.

Edit: I found a San Bernardino NF document, actually a group/frequency list and they called it "Service Net." Count is now 10 of 13 calling it that or 77%.

 

[es93546]

Just for verification, Frequency 3 is 168.6825 and 4 is 163.7125. I've been putting their list together for the 2022 load. No-one had done anything since 2018. LP just hired a new Tech and I'll be working with him to finalize it soon.

I would like anything for 2022 that you can pass on to me. I managed to get a 2021 load document on a RR thread. It might have been you who sent it to me, I've forgotten. It was all appreciated. It helps me get the wiki correct.

 

[rsmith7799]

I would like anything for 2022 that you can pass on to me. I managed to get a 2021 load document on a RR thread. It might have been you who sent it to me, I've forgotten. It was all appreciated. It helps me get the wiki correct.

As soon as it is approved, I'll get it to you and the Group.
Oh and by the way......NICE JOB ON THE UPDATES!!!!