I've spent a lot of time this summer in the forests of California, and thought I should update the data here on RR with what I've found. I am overjoyed to see that there is a link/list of most USFS frequencies on the California home page here. That's GREAT! It makes a lot more sense to list all forest frequencies there than it does to post them among the data for each county. One main reason is that forest boundaries don't usually stay within county lines.
But as I look over the data I am finding lots of errors. Here is a short list. I'd love to work with someone there at RR to get this stuff corrected (and updated).
ALPINE county is still in the old format. It shows a link to Hum-Toy NF (which is in both Calif & Nevada). This data should be moved into the common list here: http://www.radioreference.com/modules.php?name=RR&aid=4301
BUTTE county mentions the Plumas NF, but says to look in the Plumas county data to find it.
PLUMAS county does not mention any forest. The data has been (correctly) moved to the link above. My feeling is that all counties which host forests should merely point to this common link.
AMADOR, CALAVERAS, EL DORADO, SIERRA & TUOLUMNE (to name a few) counties do not make mention of ANY forests. They should direct people to the link above too.
LASSEN COUNTY mentions Lassen National Park. But guess what? Lassen National Park is NOT in Lassen county - it is in SHASTA county (and part of Tehama)!!! And SHASTA county does show it! But SHASTA county does not mention the forests (Shasta NF); and again should show that link above.
Since Shasta county shows Lassen NP, it only makes sense that TUOLUMNE (and Mariposa) counties should show YOSEMITE. I realize that Yosemite has it's own link at the Calif home page, but why not lead people to that link from the proper counties?
I am not sure where the data used to be for the STANISLAUS NF (the forest is NOT in Stanislaus county - no wonder people get confused in California), but I could not find it. It should be listed in the main listing at the link above. And then there are other forests not listed such as ANGELES.
As I look over the actual data for the forests and national parks, there is a lot of duplication and perhaps incorrect data. For example several frequencies are shown as if they belong to a park or forest when in fact they are NIFC or other agency.
But as I look over the data I am finding lots of errors. Here is a short list. I'd love to work with someone there at RR to get this stuff corrected (and updated).
ALPINE county is still in the old format. It shows a link to Hum-Toy NF (which is in both Calif & Nevada). This data should be moved into the common list here: http://www.radioreference.com/modules.php?name=RR&aid=4301
BUTTE county mentions the Plumas NF, but says to look in the Plumas county data to find it.
PLUMAS county does not mention any forest. The data has been (correctly) moved to the link above. My feeling is that all counties which host forests should merely point to this common link.
AMADOR, CALAVERAS, EL DORADO, SIERRA & TUOLUMNE (to name a few) counties do not make mention of ANY forests. They should direct people to the link above too.
LASSEN COUNTY mentions Lassen National Park. But guess what? Lassen National Park is NOT in Lassen county - it is in SHASTA county (and part of Tehama)!!! And SHASTA county does show it! But SHASTA county does not mention the forests (Shasta NF); and again should show that link above.
Since Shasta county shows Lassen NP, it only makes sense that TUOLUMNE (and Mariposa) counties should show YOSEMITE. I realize that Yosemite has it's own link at the Calif home page, but why not lead people to that link from the proper counties?
I am not sure where the data used to be for the STANISLAUS NF (the forest is NOT in Stanislaus county - no wonder people get confused in California), but I could not find it. It should be listed in the main listing at the link above. And then there are other forests not listed such as ANGELES.
As I look over the actual data for the forests and national parks, there is a lot of duplication and perhaps incorrect data. For example several frequencies are shown as if they belong to a park or forest when in fact they are NIFC or other agency.
Last edited: