cousinkix1953
Member
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2007
- Messages
- 518
The only thing that I get is a blank page. It sounds like Firefox completely rejects the whole thing...
CHP frequency use map, corrections needed
- Thread starter peteinsf
- Start date
- Status
Maybe this time?
I was finally able to download the problematic transmitter map and I re-converted it from and the back to a .pdf file. Try it at
"http://harrymarnell.net/CHPsiteMAP.pdf" - it's about 400 kb
I also made a .gif out of it which is about 613 kb, but it's quite large - 36x53" or 3433x5149 pixels, which some browsers may balk at or simply refuse to open.
It shows remote base stations, major (24 hour) dispatch centers, area and division offices, frequency and area boundaries, counties and other stuff. But also note that it was drawn in June, 1987, 22 years ago, with updates listed in 1995, 2000, 2004, and 2006. So looker-atter beware.
I was finally able to download the problematic transmitter map and I re-converted it from and the back to a .pdf file. Try it at
"http://harrymarnell.net/CHPsiteMAP.pdf" - it's about 400 kb
I also made a .gif out of it which is about 613 kb, but it's quite large - 36x53" or 3433x5149 pixels, which some browsers may balk at or simply refuse to open.
It shows remote base stations, major (24 hour) dispatch centers, area and division offices, frequency and area boundaries, counties and other stuff. But also note that it was drawn in June, 1987, 22 years ago, with updates listed in 1995, 2000, 2004, and 2006. So looker-atter beware.
Thanks a bunch! I downloaded both the GIF and PDF just fine.
I'm not horribly concerned about the date of origin, it looks like it's been looked after since and, well, mountain peaks don't move all that often either.
Good stuff in this thread! Wish I had some of this when I was traveling to SoCal and NorCal 15-18 times a year, but I still get out there at least once a year these days.
I'm not horribly concerned about the date of origin, it looks like it's been looked after since and, well, mountain peaks don't move all that often either.
Good stuff in this thread! Wish I had some of this when I was traveling to SoCal and NorCal 15-18 times a year, but I still get out there at least once a year these days.
When I moved to the eastern Sierra from New Mexico in 1981 I hooked up with a guy who had a copy of nearly the entire Department of Communications system manual, where this CHP site map comes from. Caltrans, CHP, OES, DFG, and others were included and I was able to make copies of most of it. I sure wish I could get my hands on a more recent edition
Hey Pete,
Looking at Harry's old DGS map seems to indicate that at least that NW portion of SF used to belong to the Pink, not the Violet. I'm not sure if they've changed it since. In fact I'm surprised that it looks like the Pink goes all the way down to the 380 freeway (into San Mateo County) but it could just be the resolution of the map
I also wanted to query you on your boundaries for the Bronze and the Maroon in the east bay. I was under the impression that the Maroon extended all the way west to Point Richmond (and the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge) and the DGS map seems to confirm this. It looks like the dividing line between the Maroon and the Bronze is south of the Richmond Harbor, so it's probably just the county line between Contra Costa & Alameda counties. The Bronze sure is a busy freq given the relatively small area it covers!
Speaking of which, Maroon is a shade of red (not blue). Therefore it might clear up some confusion if you gave Contra Costa county some shade of red that seems appropriately "maroonish."
Finally, I really like the idea of drawing thicker black boundary lines between the boundaries of dispatch center's areas. Since most of the frequency information I've seen for CHP is categorized by which office it's dispatched from, this would seem like an appropriate addition to aid the user in finding the correct frequency. No text clutter, just thicker lines between dispatch offices (the DGS map does this as well).
Thanks again for giving us the opportunity to comment! It already looks great, and it can only get better the more we discuss it.
Regards,
Inigo
Looking at Harry's old DGS map seems to indicate that at least that NW portion of SF used to belong to the Pink, not the Violet. I'm not sure if they've changed it since. In fact I'm surprised that it looks like the Pink goes all the way down to the 380 freeway (into San Mateo County) but it could just be the resolution of the map
I also wanted to query you on your boundaries for the Bronze and the Maroon in the east bay. I was under the impression that the Maroon extended all the way west to Point Richmond (and the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge) and the DGS map seems to confirm this. It looks like the dividing line between the Maroon and the Bronze is south of the Richmond Harbor, so it's probably just the county line between Contra Costa & Alameda counties. The Bronze sure is a busy freq given the relatively small area it covers!
Speaking of which, Maroon is a shade of red (not blue). Therefore it might clear up some confusion if you gave Contra Costa county some shade of red that seems appropriately "maroonish."
Finally, I really like the idea of drawing thicker black boundary lines between the boundaries of dispatch center's areas. Since most of the frequency information I've seen for CHP is categorized by which office it's dispatched from, this would seem like an appropriate addition to aid the user in finding the correct frequency. No text clutter, just thicker lines between dispatch offices (the DGS map does this as well).
Thanks again for giving us the opportunity to comment! It already looks great, and it can only get better the more we discuss it.
Regards,
Inigo
Radio_Lady
Member
Hey Harry,
An even more efficient way to use the CADWEB site to look for questionable locations vs areas would be to use the Filed Incidents function, right hand dropdown.
Or go straight to Golden Gate CC Filed Incident Report for the Bay Area
Sacramento CC Filed Incident Report for Sacramento
Los Angles CC Filed Incident Report for Los Angeles
San Diego CC Filed Incident Report for San Diego
and so forth.
The current incident pages show, well, just the current incidents. The Filed Incidents page, though, goes back for hours, but I don't know what their cut-off limits are. The data shown will change depending when any of you are reading this message, but the Filed page for the Golden Gate Communications Center as of 02:25, goes back about 4 hours with maybe 100 incidents displayed. In fact, it's EXACTLY 100 incidents. Could be their limit, ya think? All that needs to be done is to scan down the right two columns looking for either locations or area names that are in question.
RL
Thank you for the filed incidents reference!
I may stand corrected on the boundaries of the Bronze. Just came across this incident on CAD:
0851D0712 10:56AM Disabled Vehicle WB I80 JWO HILLTOP DR Oakland
I-80 @ Hilltop Dr is El Sobrante / San Pablo... well into Contra Costa County. In this case the Oakland Area (Bronze) may extend all the way up past Point Richmond and border the Violet at the Richmond San Rafael Bridge (as depicted on the map).
Inigo
I may stand corrected on the boundaries of the Bronze. Just came across this incident on CAD:
0851D0712 10:56AM Disabled Vehicle WB I80 JWO HILLTOP DR Oakland
I-80 @ Hilltop Dr is El Sobrante / San Pablo... well into Contra Costa County. In this case the Oakland Area (Bronze) may extend all the way up past Point Richmond and border the Violet at the Richmond San Rafael Bridge (as depicted on the map).
Inigo
Update on the NW San Francisco area, I-280 at John Daly Blvd in Daly City is San Francisco Area:
1268 2:10PM Traffic Hazard - Debris/Objects NB I280 JSO JOHN DALY BLVD San Francisco
If NW SF is covered on the Violet, it for sure doesn't extend south past the Lake Merced area. I'll keep an eye out for incidents north of here to see what the area shows up as.
Inigo
1268 2:10PM Traffic Hazard - Debris/Objects NB I280 JSO JOHN DALY BLVD San Francisco
If NW SF is covered on the Violet, it for sure doesn't extend south past the Lake Merced area. I'll keep an eye out for incidents north of here to see what the area shows up as.
Inigo
Excellent job Pete and to all who are contributing. This is probably one of the better examples of some positive collaboration in a while!
I'd like to add my comments as I have not seen them referenced yet.
1. The West Valley area in Southern Division appears to be Turquoise to me and should be Teal.
2. The Ventura area appears Teal and should be Purple.
Besides that the borders look just fine based on county lines.
Great job! My guess is that the department is going to be interested in this for themselves...
Greg
I'd like to add my comments as I have not seen them referenced yet.
1. The West Valley area in Southern Division appears to be Turquoise to me and should be Teal.
2. The Ventura area appears Teal and should be Purple.
Besides that the borders look just fine based on county lines.
Great job! My guess is that the department is going to be interested in this for themselves...
Greg
The new Rancho Cordova office (currently on the Black) extends into El Dorado County according to this posting: http://forums.radioreference.com/ca.../129878-chp-east-sacramento-2.html#post990305
I could not verify Joshua Tree, Redwoods, or Pt. Reyes. There isn't a site with a list of National Parks with the jurisdiction of each park listed, at least that I could find after extensive searching. I read the enabling legislation for Lassen, which indicates it is exclusive and already knew that Yosemite and Sequoia-Kings Canyon are also exclusive. For now I would just keep the colors out of those three parks.
Redwoods was a recent addition to the National Park system (1968), Pt. Reyes the same, and Joshua Tree was a National Monument until 1994, so there is a good chance that all are concurrent. Keep the colors in these.
If I find anything different I will let you know.
Last edited:
I *believe* Point Reyes Nat'l Seashore is concurrent. County sheriff's deputies and NPS protection rangers will often respond to the same incident within the park.
I've never heard CHP respond into it, but there are no state highways within the park and I've never heard any major traffic accidents there either. Marin has one roaming unit "34-46 Victor" that can often be found along S.R. 1 in Point Reyes or Tomales, in the vicinity of the park. I know that 34 is the number for the Marin district, with 46 being the beat number. I asked about the "Victor" and "Edward" designators a while back (they're used at the end of the unit ID just like "Mary" for a motorcycle unit) - but people said they vary from office to office. "Edward" is definitely extra units for special details, like the bridge detail. I'm still not 100% sure on "Victor." Someone suggested it might be a Camaro, but I was never able to confirm.
Regards,
Inigo
I've never heard CHP respond into it, but there are no state highways within the park and I've never heard any major traffic accidents there either. Marin has one roaming unit "34-46 Victor" that can often be found along S.R. 1 in Point Reyes or Tomales, in the vicinity of the park. I know that 34 is the number for the Marin district, with 46 being the beat number. I asked about the "Victor" and "Edward" designators a while back (they're used at the end of the unit ID just like "Mary" for a motorcycle unit) - but people said they vary from office to office. "Edward" is definitely extra units for special details, like the bridge detail. I'm still not 100% sure on "Victor." Someone suggested it might be a Camaro, but I was never able to confirm.
Regards,
Inigo
Great Job on this map, Pete!
One needs to be a local of sorts to know this info. On the I-5 corridor from Tracy to the Merced County line efficiency gave the Tracy office the duty of patrolling this section. I do not know how far east they go, or if they are limited to just the freeway proper, leaving just when a need will arise and requests are made. The area west of I-5 has less roads (mostly trails) that one can count on one hand. I am not sure if the Modesto units would cover this area on a primary response or not. (Yes, that's an invite for someone in the know to chime in.)
Trivia on channel colors - Living in the Bay Area when the San Francisco CHP Dispatch Center expanded the channels used, from the one or two (I cannot recall if they had Silver in operation then or not) that they were using, I saw some creative changes. Keep in mind they had no way the number of frequencies that they do today. They took the "Red" channel and the "White" channel and, if memory is right, used the mobile white on the base red to come up with "Pink." This was back in the days when it would not me unusual to have hear units from outside your "home turf."
Thanks again, Pete....
One needs to be a local of sorts to know this info. On the I-5 corridor from Tracy to the Merced County line efficiency gave the Tracy office the duty of patrolling this section. I do not know how far east they go, or if they are limited to just the freeway proper, leaving just when a need will arise and requests are made. The area west of I-5 has less roads (mostly trails) that one can count on one hand. I am not sure if the Modesto units would cover this area on a primary response or not. (Yes, that's an invite for someone in the know to chime in.)
Trivia on channel colors - Living in the Bay Area when the San Francisco CHP Dispatch Center expanded the channels used, from the one or two (I cannot recall if they had Silver in operation then or not) that they were using, I saw some creative changes. Keep in mind they had no way the number of frequencies that they do today. They took the "Red" channel and the "White" channel and, if memory is right, used the mobile white on the base red to come up with "Pink." This was back in the days when it would not me unusual to have hear units from outside your "home turf."
Thanks again, Pete....
cousinkix1953
Member
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2007
- Messages
- 518
San Jose was using "silver" 42.50 / 42.82 in the 80s and 90s. Before that it was "brown" 42.50 / 42.28 back in the 70s...
....
I can't find anything either about Redwood and CHP, however it's technically named "Redwood National and State Parks," and was one of the first parks in the NPS system jointly managed by the NPS and the State of California (several preexisting State Parks are wholly within the National Park boundaries. In a document which provides for approved Park Rangers to be deputized as Humboldt County Sheriff's Deputies at page 1 and again at page 5 is the statement that "the United States and the State of California currently exercise concurrent jurisdiction over the Federal lands of Redwood National Park..."
Back on the ground, at any rate, my observation for years has been that while NPS rangers (on 165.1625) handle most criminal stuff, CHP handles at least all the serious traffic incidents within the park's boundaries, both on and off the highway. The same applies to the State-only parks south of Eureka, where the DPR rangers (on 151.01R) handle most criminal stuff, but CHP is called in for traffic. I'd leave it green on the map too for now, but I'll start paying closer attention, or ask a CHP officer the next time I get pulled over.
Last edited:
landonjensen
Member
What software are you guys using to make this map? I'd like to make the same for my local FD....
OT Alert --- OT Alert
They were able to buy at least 20 "extra" years in the late 80s when LASD went to UHF and most if not all of their 39 MHz freqs went to the CHP. But even with those dozen or so frequencies, there are still more than 20 CHP freqs that are paired up with one frequency here, another one there, and yet another one somewhere else around the state - up to four times, to try to provide coverage but minimize interference.
In 1998 they tried to add a few additional sites and some 42 and 44 MHZ freqs to their system, but since it was low band, they had to get concurrence from all the state agencies across the country on 42/44 MHz. It took 8 years, until 9/11/2006, before they were finally able please (or give in to) everybody and get the FCC's authorization. In your spare time take a look at the wide range of responses and attitudes to the CHP's request for Letters of Concurrence, at http://harrymarnell.net/1998-2006-modLOCs.pdf. Neighboring Oregon and Nevada were pretty much fine with it (p9 and p19), and West Virginia (pgs 26-29), with typical Southern graciousness and hospitality, just couldn't be helpful enough -- including their profound apology on p27 for the inadvertent 6-year delay in replying! And then there was Illinois, who apparently had their Department of Obstruction handle the request (pgs 45-47), with "not that freq" "not that PL" "not THERE" and an overall "just because" bunch of objections and conditions.
Sorry I went off-topic again. But it shows what a PITA it can be to do frequency coordination on VHF low.
TRIVIA cont'd -Silver and pink go back at least to 1987 in the Bay area and 1984 in So Cal. The big benefit of low-band - its propagation distance - is also its biggest drawback, of course, so CHP has had to play mix 'n match with TX/RX pairings and sites and tones for decades.
They were able to buy at least 20 "extra" years in the late 80s when LASD went to UHF and most if not all of their 39 MHz freqs went to the CHP. But even with those dozen or so frequencies, there are still more than 20 CHP freqs that are paired up with one frequency here, another one there, and yet another one somewhere else around the state - up to four times, to try to provide coverage but minimize interference.
In 1998 they tried to add a few additional sites and some 42 and 44 MHZ freqs to their system, but since it was low band, they had to get concurrence from all the state agencies across the country on 42/44 MHz. It took 8 years, until 9/11/2006, before they were finally able please (or give in to) everybody and get the FCC's authorization. In your spare time take a look at the wide range of responses and attitudes to the CHP's request for Letters of Concurrence, at http://harrymarnell.net/1998-2006-modLOCs.pdf. Neighboring Oregon and Nevada were pretty much fine with it (p9 and p19), and West Virginia (pgs 26-29), with typical Southern graciousness and hospitality, just couldn't be helpful enough -- including their profound apology on p27 for the inadvertent 6-year delay in replying! And then there was Illinois, who apparently had their Department of Obstruction handle the request (pgs 45-47), with "not that freq" "not that PL" "not THERE" and an overall "just because" bunch of objections and conditions.
Sorry I went off-topic again. But it shows what a PITA it can be to do frequency coordination on VHF low.
Last edited:
awesome map
thank you -
thank you -
This was a great find. Thanks for all of the work all of you have done.
Post the specific areas needed?
To make this project more efficient, how about people post the specific areas where the CHP area and frequency boundaries aren't clear, so the rest of us can keep an eye/ear on them. Then if someone does know or figure out the answer, they can let the rest of us know and we can "check it off the list" and move on to other ambiguous areas.
Brief, location-specific posts (something I've never been known to make), maybe with a relevant "Title" line at the top of each, would be the easiest to keep track of.
To make this project more efficient, how about people post the specific areas where the CHP area and frequency boundaries aren't clear, so the rest of us can keep an eye/ear on them. Then if someone does know or figure out the answer, they can let the rest of us know and we can "check it off the list" and move on to other ambiguous areas.
Brief, location-specific posts (something I've never been known to make), maybe with a relevant "Title" line at the top of each, would be the easiest to keep track of.
Last edited:
- Status
