Lowndes County, GA – Full Encryption: Why?

[bradjtrammell]

So I recently relocated from New York to Georgia and was absolutely stunned to discover that nearly the entire radio system in Lowndes County is fully encrypted. Aside from a few smaller agencies still running analog, there’s nothing left to monitor. Zero public safety traffic, nothing from law, fire, or EMS — everything is locked down.


Why?


As a former first responder, this level of blanket encryption is foreign to me. In NY, even with P25 systems, there was a balance — tactical or sensitive channels were encrypted, but dispatch and routine ops remained in the clear. That approach maintained transparency and allowed the public to monitor major events, stay informed, and support community awareness, while still protecting officer safety and operational security where appropriate.


Now I’m sitting on hundreds of dollars in scanners and RTL-SDR gear that are suddenly obsolete for anything local.


I'm not interested in arguing if encryption should exist, your personal opinion has no effect on what I want to know. — I'm more interested on WHY it was applied for this specific system. So here’s what I’m looking for:

• Does anyone have a factual timeline of when Lowndes County transitioned to full encryption, and why?
• Was it a gradual rollout or a sudden flip?
• Was the decision driven by public safety leadership, vendor pressure, or misunderstanding of how P25 can provide secure comms without shutting out the public entirely?
• Did the scanner community put up a fight or was it just taken with no argument?

I'm big on facts over fear or assumptions, and I'd genuinely appreciate insight from anyone with knowledge of the decision-making process here — especially if someone local was involved in the transition or knows the policy justification, or spoke at any meetings discussing it.

Edit #1: Yes I know trying to decrypt it is against federal law. No I'm not asking to decrypt it. I just want to know why.

 

[MTS2000des]

Because they can.

Seriously, it's a done deal. Encryption is coming on strong in this state. Find something else to listen to. As a former first responder, I am sure you concur radio systems are for the safety and security of the users, not for entertainment for the general public.

We could say since the "summer of love" 5 years ago, much is changing in this state regarding comsec. Get used to it. There is still much more to monitor like aircraft, railroads, private businesses, amateur radio. Decisions to encrypt are usually done by command staff after discussions at the local, county and state level. COMSEC is a major topic of discussion these days and it is easy and cost effective to achieve.

NYCPD is moving to full time AES encryption so it may have been foreign in the past but not in 2025. It's happening everywhere not just in Georgia.

 

[GeorgiaScan]

Drug enforcement on I-75 is a big money maker for Lowndes. Being the last county on a major highway heading into Florida is like a funnel for drug running. They have a team dedicated just to Interstate drug enforcement, I.C.E. Lots of money riding on keeping those comms secured. I guess it was just as easy to make ALL comms encrypted.

2015 is when everything went silent for the city and county as it is a shared system:

Police scanners go silent - Valdosta Daily Times

Lowndes Co. Sheriff’s Office Interstate team aims to stop drug transportation

LCSO make multiple I-75 drug busts with I.C.E. team

Nearly $1 million in cocaine seized in Columbia County by criminal interdiction teams

 

[bradjtrammell]

As a former first responder, I am sure you concur radio systems are for the safety and security of the users, not for entertainment for the general public.

Actually, I don’t agree with that at all. Public safety radio systems are funded by taxpayers — and while yes, security is important, so is transparency and accountability.

I believe it's a civic responsibility to let the public hear (when possible) how their tax dollars are being spent — from how we respond, to how we speak, and how we handle emergencies. That kind of transparency fosters trust, improves community engagement, and helps educate the public on what we face in the field.

Allowing non-sensitive, day-to-day communications to remain unencrypted is the simplest and most effective way to maintain that balance. Full encryption shuts the door on that trust and invites more suspicion than it prevents. I've always opposed full blanket encryption — and I still do. Having been on the other side of the radio, I know what goes on, and I know sometimes how vital it is for the public to be able to access it.

Find something else to listen to.

I’m not interested in aircraft, rail, business, or amateur radio — those aren’t relevant to why I’ve been involved in monitoring public safety communications. It’s not just about “listening in,” it’s about staying informed, understanding local response patterns, and maintaining situational awareness — especially as someone with a background in the field.

Telling people to “get over it” because agencies choose full encryption essentially removes a legitimate public-interest hobby and accountability tool. If the answer is simply “because they can,” then that’s not a policy — that’s a brush-off. I’m looking for the reasoning, the timeline, and what influenced the shift — not a shrug and a dismissal.

Drug enforcement on I-75 is a big money maker for Lowndes. Being the last county on a major highway heading into Florida is like a funnel for drug running. They have a team dedicated just to Interstate drug enforcement, I.C.E. Lots of money riding on keeping those comms secured. I guess it was just as easy to make ALL comms encrypted.

2015 is when everything went silent for the city and county as it is a shared system

Thanks — This was exactly the type of response I was looking to get, and that actually helps put things into context.

I wasn’t aware of the I.C.E. team or how much emphasis Lowndes places on drug interdiction along I-75. That does make sense as a motivator for securing certain comms, especially for operations that involve asset forfeiture or ongoing investigations.

Still, it's unfortunate that the decision was to encrypt everything, rather than designing the system correctly and just encrypting the specialized or tactical channels. Many other jurisdictions strike a better balance — keeping sensitive units encrypted while leaving dispatch or routine traffic in the clear for transparency and public situational awareness.

But 2015 being the tipping point is exactly the kind of factual info I was hoping to gather. Appreciate that insight, and the sources to back up your facts.

 

[MTS2000des]

Actually, I don’t agree with that at all. Public safety radio systems are funded by taxpayers — and while yes, security is important, so is transparency and accountability.

I believe it's a civic responsibility to let the public hear (when possible) how their tax dollars are being spent — from how we respond, to how we speak, and how we handle emergencies. That kind of transparency fosters trust, improves community engagement, and helps educate the public on what we face in the field.

Allowing non-sensitive, day-to-day communications to remain unencrypted is the simplest and most effective way to maintain that balance. Full encryption shuts the door on that trust and invites more suspicion than it prevents. I've always opposed full blanket encryption — and I still do. Having been on the other side of the radio, I know what goes on, and I know sometimes how vital it is for the public to be able to access it.

You don't get it. Radio systems are tools used by professionals to enhance safety of the users, and provide efficient tools for their work. COMSEC is a huge part of this. Nothing in the law in this state requires systems to be open. The nature of LMR has allowed those outside to casually intercept communications by virtue of the technology in use at the time.

In 2025, secure communications are standard fare. Think about it. At one time, cellular telephones used analog FM and one could even hear them on a TV set with a tuner capable of tuning channels 70-83. Sure it became illegal. Then cellular systems went digital and naturally encrypted. Same thing with even part 15 devices like cordless phones.

Saying that technology should be held back just so private persons can be infotained is asinine especially at the expense of public safety. Tax dollars get spent on IT infrastructure used by govs, so I guess by your logic every access point should be open, ever email sent unencrypted, and every port on every network left open for "all to see" in the name of transparency.

On that note, nothing is stopping you from filing open records requests under GORA and getting audio logging recordings, dispatch/CAD reports, even radio system reports if you know how to ask. Sure, you may have to pay a fee because it does take a person to assemble, verify and produce said records, but it is all there for one to request.

You or I can't take a slam in the judges' chambers toilet in the courthouse even though we paid for it.

I get it, you're upset because something you enjoyed has gone away. Think with logic not emotion and see that as others explained, it's to keep those who are in that ground zero area of drug trafficking USA comms secure so Hector Salamanca and the Gustavo Frings can't listen in.
It's so those who are running calls aren't having private info live streamed to Facbook/Instagram. It's so the whackers with funeral escort companies can't have pirated subscribers with CopSounds™ blaring from their Ebay parts radio bootleg programmed on a PS system.

In the near future, LMR will be taking a back seat to LTE/5G/6G converged systems. On the system I manage, we are rolling out broadband subscribers like MdDonald's sells QPCs. Users expect to communicate without boundaries. LTE is naturally encrypted. It is also a metric ton cheaper than old school LMR. Look at GSP and what the state is doing.

You may not like what I said but it doesn't changes facts. Scanning ia a great hobby but it too is changing. I loved making cassette tapes on my Nakamichi RX-505 but technology has advacned so I don't have to. Crying and whining because Maxell quit making type IV blank tape isn't going to change the fact that technology has moved on. One can either get down or lay down. It's realiity,

 

[bradjtrammell]

You don't get it. Radio systems are tools used by professionals to enhance safety of the users, and provide efficient tools for their work. COMSEC is a huge part of this. Nothing in the law in this state requires systems to be open. The nature of LMR has allowed those outside to casually intercept communications by virtue of the technology in use at the time.

In 2025, secure communications are standard fare. Think about it. At one time, cellular telephones used analog FM and one could even hear them on a TV set with a tuner capable of tuning channels 70-83. Sure it became illegal. Then cellular systems went digital and naturally encrypted. Same thing with even part 15 devices like cordless phones.

Saying that technology should be held back just so private persons can be infotained is asinine especially at the expense of public safety. Tax dollars get spent on IT infrastructure used by govs, so I guess by your logic every access point should be open, ever email sent unencrypted, and every port on every network left open for "all to see" in the name of transparency.

On that note, nothing is stopping you from filing open records requests under GORA and getting audio logging recordings, dispatch/CAD reports, even radio system reports if you know how to ask. Sure, you may have to pay a fee because it does take a person to assemble, verify and produce said records, but it is all there for one to request.

You or I can't take a slam in the judges' chambers toilet in the courthouse even though we paid for it.

I get it, you're upset because something you enjoyed has gone away. Think with logic not emotion and see that as others explained, it's to keep those who are in that ground zero area of drug trafficking USA comms secure so Hector Salamanca and the Gustavo Frings can't listen in.
It's so those who are running calls aren't having private info live streamed to Facbook/Instagram. It's so the whackers with funeral escort companies can't have pirated subscribers with CopSounds™ blaring from their Ebay parts radio bootleg programmed on a PS system.

In the near future, LMR will be taking a back seat to LTE/5G/6G converged systems. On the system I manage, we are rolling out broadband subscribers like MdDonald's sells QPCs. Users expect to communicate without boundaries. LTE is naturally encrypted. It is also a metric ton cheaper than old school LMR. Look at GSP and what the state is doing.

You may not like what I said but it doesn't changes facts. Scanning ia a great hobby but it too is changing. I loved making cassette tapes on my Nakamichi RX-505 but technology has advacned so I don't have to. Crying and whining because Maxell quit making type IV blank tape isn't going to change the fact that technology has moved on. One can either get down or lay down. It's realiity,

I completely understand the importance of secure communications, and I appreciate the points made. That said, I want to clarify where I’m coming from.


My original post wasn’t meant to debate the merits of encryption — it was simply to ask a factual question about why Lowndes County chose to encrypt all channels and what the timeline or reasoning behind that decision was. One of the responses helpfully mentioned the ICE operations and the system transition around 2015, which is exactly the type of context I was looking for.

To be clear, I never suggested that encryption shouldn't be used, nor did I imply that all government systems should be open. Drawing comparisons to email servers or courthouse bathrooms feels a bit off-topic — public safety dispatch traffic has historically been monitored for decades by civilians, and there’s still a valid discussion to be had about how to balance operational security with public awareness. But this is hardly the place to do it, given the forum's strict rule against discussions debating encryption.

Many jurisdictions do this well — encrypting sensitive or tactical channels while leaving routine dispatch traffic in the clear. That model respects both security and transparency, and it works without putting anyone at risk. The system I used every day employed this tactic and it worked well for all involved and provided the community the ability to monitor whatever they could happily.


And yes, I know GORA exists and can be used to request records. But real-time access to dispatch audio still plays an important role for community safety. It's not just for entertainment, as is often assumed.

At the end of the day, I wasn’t looking to debate encryption policy — I just wanted to better understand the local decisions that led to full encryption in this case. I’ve since received that context, so I consider the question answered. Thanks to those who contributed constructively. This topic can be marked closed.

 

[MTS2000des]

The idea of selectable encryption isn't practical. I manage over 7,000 subscribers across 23 agencies. The dynamic nature of incidents changing by the second don't give time for people to "switch" to encryption. It's an all in kind of deal.

Now that you understand the dynamics at hand in your area, you seem stuck on the concept that "dispatch traffic has historically been monitored by civilians" but this is only due to the nature of the tech in use at the time. We've advanced beyond this.

In all fairness, we're late to the party. Other part of the world have moved to secure LMR over 20 years ago. In most of the UK and EU, TETRAPOL has been the standard for trunked public safety radio. 100 percent encrypted. 100 percent off limits. That is going to eventually be replaced by a broadband network.

In those places, scanning public safety radio ended two decades ago, and even in the days when it was possible, it was a taboo subject, unlike here where every blogger and "influencer" feels the need to flatualte out onto social media everything they think they heard/saw.

Agencies use systems like Nixle to inform the public of incidents, some put their CAD data online (and scrub any sensitive info such as PII or PHI) and this might be something one could suggest to your PSAP/ECCs. Of coruse this takes funding, technical skill and a desire on part of he agencies involved, but it's done in other places like Miami Dade Fire.

 

[kc2asb]

As a former first responder, this level of blanket encryption is foreign to me. In NY, even with P25 systems, there was a balance — tactical or sensitive channels were encrypted, but dispatch and routine ops remained in the clear. That approach maintained transparency and allowed the public to monitor major events, stay informed, and support community awareness, while still protecting officer safety and operational security where appropriate.


Now I’m sitting on hundreds of dollars in scanners and RTL-SDR gear that are suddenly obsolete for anything local.

Things have changed in NY. All NYPD precinct dispatch channels will be full-time encryption by the end of the summer. No provision for the public or press to listen via a delayed dispatch feed(s) has been made.

Chicago and Baltimore are among other major cities that rolled out full-time encryption. However, they provided delayed dispatch-only feeds on Broadcastify.

Why? I agree with what others have said above - because they can. The technology is no longer exotic or uber expensive. Also, agencies have to comply with DOJ regs regarding the protection of personally identifiable information. (PII)

I also have three digital scanners (approx $1,400 total) that were purchased for monitoring my local and surrounding departments that were P25. Almost have rolled out full-time encryption since. Now I mostly monitor aircraft, marine, railroads, business band, GMRS, etc. It is what it is and there is no stopping it.

 

[Echo4Thirty]

I can tell you as someone who has implemented new radio systems as both an agency and manufacturer employee, the ONLY time scanners get brought up is when someone asks about streaming. Honestly, most of the time they didnt care about the local folks with scanners. It was the media and their radio audio traffic showing up on the 6pm news. I can say lately the 1st ammendment audit guys and independant news stringers have been a trigger. Regardless of what side you are on regarding them, its just simply not a good idea blaring their radio traffic on the same scene as them. A few folks ruin it for everyone else.

At no other time was the concept of the public and their listening brought up during the meetings for these systems. We didnt care if the scanners work, or if they would have simulcast distortion. It was all about where the subscribers were located and what their needs were for both coverage and security.

I am all for dispatch being in the clear, but its whatever the agency wants for their needs is what happens. Scanner folks would literally scream at me that its their right to listen and it was illegal for us to encrypt, it got old. I would ask them if they also thought they could pop into the police station and use their computers or WiFi. As stated above, these radio systems have evolved into the IT realm (and are often managed by I.T. folks) and as such fall under the same security policies as their LAN/WAN infrastructure. I once even got a call from a local FCC field agent buddy of mine when one noise maker actually filed a complaint that we had encrypted dispatch.

 

[w4sga]

Agree completely with Echo4Thirty it's just an extension of the IT world into the radio system. Around here, in South Coastal Georgia, there is still plenty to listen to. Cops, DNR, Fire, EMS. Aircraft freqs for airports near you and the flight radar app tracking the planes is fun. And don't think the railroad band can't be enjoyable. There are tracks and yards everywhere! Enjoy what you have.