Connect with us

California

California Grizzlies Weren't as Big—or Bloodthirsty—as People Once Thought

Published

on

California Grizzlies Weren't as Big—or Bloodthirsty—as People Once Thought


A California grizzly bear specimen at the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History. The brown bear subspecies went extinct around 1924.
Vahe Martirosyan via Flickr under CC BY-SA 2.0 DEED

Historical accounts often portrayed the now-extinct California grizzly bears as huge, bloodthirsty beasts ready to pounce on humans and attack livestock at any time.

But while that probably made for some good stories, scientists say the truth may have been less dramatic: The bears ate a mostly vegetarian diet and were smaller than portrayed, according to a new paper published Wednesday in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B.

California grizzly bears (Ursus arctos californicus) once roamed the Golden State. But when European—and later, American—settlers began setting up farms there, they removed and fragmented much of the bears’ habitat. In addition, settlers often hunted, poisoned and trapped the creatures, which they viewed as dangerous livestock-killers. Some counties even offered bounties for the bears.

“They were built up as monsters that had to be overcome,” says study co-author Peter Alagona, an environmental historian at the University of California Santa Barbara, to the Atlantic’s Katherine J. Wu.

Advertisement

Over time, because of these human activities, the California grizzly population plummeted. The last reliable sighting of a California grizzly bear occurred 100 years ago in 1924, and the animals disappeared completely sometime after that.

Researchers wanted to get a better understanding of the factors that hastened the bears’ demise. They also hoped to gain more insight into the creatures’ behavior, size and diet.

To do so, they turned to archival documents—such as newspapers, diaries and other historical sources—and California grizzly specimens in natural history collections. They measured the animals’ skulls and teeth to get a sense of their overall body size, and they analyzed their bones and pelts for chemical elements that would indicate what the bears ate while they were alive.

California grizzly bears were about the same size as today’s living grizzlies—roughly 440 pounds—which is much smaller than the 2,000 pounds often reported at the time, the researchers found. Historical accounts may not necessarily have been wrong, but they might have only included the largest bears. Hunters likely targeted the biggest behemoths to earn more money and to boost their own reputations, according to the researchers.

In addition, analyses of the animals’ bones and pelts suggest the bears were primarily eating plants—both before and after Europeans arrived in the region in 1542—which stands in stark contrast to their fearsome, hyper-carnivorous reputation.

Advertisement

Pre-European arrival, 90 percent of the bears’ nutrition came from plants, and 10 percent came from animal meat, the researchers found. Those numbers did shift slightly with the proliferation of farming and ranching, with meat rising to account for 26 percent of the bears’ diet.

“The bears likely increased meat consumption due to landscape changes coupled with the arrival of a new source of protein—livestock,” says study co-author Alexis Mychajliw, a biologist at Middlebury College, to Live Science’s Sascha Pare. However, researchers found the animals still ate a majority vegetarian diet and killed far less livestock than historical accounts suggested.

Zooming out, the findings indicate that human activities can alter an animal’s behavior and diet. But these shifts can also lead to “exaggerated predation narratives” that “incentivize persecution, triggering rapid loss of an otherwise widespread and ecologically flexible animal,” the researchers write in the paper.

By digging beyond the bears’ reputation, the researchers gleaned a more accurate understanding of the California grizzly’s biology and natural history. And since scientists and land managers often rely on historical accounts when reintroducing animals to their former habitats, the study serves as a reminder that old newspapers and journals may not tell the whole story.

“Every piece of history you read about California grizzlies really describes them as being these monsters, incredibly large,” says Alex McInturff, an ecologist at the University of Washington who was not involved in the new paper, to Science’s Rodrigo Pérez Ortega. “So, to hear that they were just like the bears that you see now, that was pretty surprising to me.”

Advertisement

Get the latest stories in your inbox every weekday.



Source link

California

PlayOn Sports fined $1.1 million by California watchdog over student data violations

Published

on

PlayOn Sports fined .1 million by California watchdog over student data violations


California’s privacy watchdog has ordered PlayOn Sports to pay a $1.10 million fine and change how it handles consumer data after finding the company’s practices violated state law in ways that affected students and schools in the state.

The California Privacy Protection Agency Board issued the decision following a settlement reached by CalPrivacy’s Enforcement Division.

The decision is the first by the board to address privacy violations involving students and California schools.

Schools across the country use PlayOn Sports’ GoFan platform to sell digital tickets to high school sporting events, theater performances, and homecoming and prom dances, with attendees presenting tickets at the door on their mobile phones.

Advertisement

Schools also use PlayOn Sports’ platforms for other sports-related activities, including attending games, streaming them online, and looking up statistics about teams and players.

In California, about 1,400 schools contract with PlayOn Sports for these services.

[RELATED] X faces possible fines as EU probes Grok nonconsensual, sexualized deepfakes

GoFan is also the official ticketing platform for the California Interscholastic Federation, the governing body for high school sports.

According to the board’s decision, PlayOn Sports used tracking technologies to collect personal information and deliver targeted advertisements to ticketholders and others using its services.

Advertisement

The company allegedly required Californians to click “agree” to tracking technologies before they could use their tickets or view PlayOn Sports websites, without providing a sufficient opt-out option.

“Students trying to go to prom or a high school football game shouldn’t have to leave their privacy rights at the door,” said Michael Macko, CalPrivacy’s head of enforcement. “You couldn’t attend these events without showing your ticket, and you couldn’t show your ticket without being tracked for advertising. California’s privacy law does not work that way. Businesses must ensure they offer lawful ways for Californians to opt-out, particularly with captive audiences.”

The decision also describes students as a uniquely vulnerable population and warns that targeted advertising systems can subject students to profiling that can follow them for years, expose them to manipulative or harmful content, and develop sensitive inferences about their lives.

Instead of providing its own opt-out method, PlayOn Sports directed students and other users to opt out through the Network Advertising Initiative and the Digital Advertising Alliance, which the decision said violated the company’s responsibility to provide its own way for consumers to opt out. The company also allegedly failed to recognize opt-out preference signals and did not provide Californians with sufficient notice of its privacy practices.

“We are committed to making it as easy as possible for all Californians — from high school students to older adults, and everyone in between — to make the choice of whether they want to be tracked or not,” said Tom Kemp, CalPrivacy’s executive director. “Californians can opt-out with covered businesses, and they can sign up for the newly launched DROP system to request that data brokers delete their personal information.”

Advertisement

Beyond the $1.10 million fine, the board’s order requires PlayOn Sports to conduct risk assessments, provide disclosures that are easy to read and understand, and implement proper opt-out methods.

The order also requires the company to comply with California’s privacy law prohibiting the selling or sharing of personal information of consumers between 13 and 16 without their affirmative opt-in consent.



Source link

Continue Reading

California

California bill to bar police from taking second job with ICE advances in state Assembly

Published

on

California bill to bar police from taking second job with ICE advances in state Assembly


Wednesday, March 4, 2026 4:43AM

CA bill to keep police from moonlighting with ICE advances

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (KABC) — A bill that would prevent police officers from moonlighting with federal immigration enforcement agencies, such as U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, is advancing through the California State Assembly.

AB 1537 passed the State Assembly’s committee on public safety on Tuesday.

The bill also requires that officers report any offers for secondary employment related to immigration enforcement to their place of work.

Those failing to comply could face decertification as a peace officer in California.

Advertisement

The bill was introduced by Assemblymember Isaac Bryan, whose district includes Mar Vista, Ladera Heights, Mid-Wilshire and parts of South Los Angeles.

Copyright © 2026 KABC Television, LLC. All rights reserved.



Source link

Continue Reading

California

Can’t win in primary election? Drop out, California Democrats say

Published

on

Can’t win in primary election? Drop out, California Democrats say


play

California Democrats running for governor, your party has a message for you. Think carefully about your candidacy and campaign ahead of the swiftly approaching filing deadline.

California Democratic Party Chair Rusty Hicks urged candidates looking to assume the state’s highest office to “honestly assess the viability of their candidacy and campaign” as March 6, the final day to declare candidacy, nears. Hicks said that concerns about the crowded field of Democrat candidates “persist” in an open letter on Tuesday, March 3.

Advertisement

It comes as five leading candidates, several of which are Democrats — Katie Porter, Eric Swalwell, and Tom Steyer — are in a “virtual tie” per a recent poll, the Desert Sun reported, which is part of the USA TODAY Network.

Two Republican candidates pushing out California democrats in the gubernatorial bid may be “implausible,” but “it is not impossible,” Hicks said of the reasoning behind his latest message. Steve Hilton and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, both Republicans, lead in RealClear Polling’s average of various polls.

The party chair spotlighted the need for California Democrats’ leadership, particularly over Proposition 50, the voter-approved measure that will temporarily implement new congressional district maps, paving the way for Democrats to secure more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives.

“If in the unlikely event a Democrat failed to proceed to the general election for governor, there could be the potential for depressed Democratic turnout in California in November,” Hicks said. “The result would present a real risk to winning the congressional seats required and imperil Democrats’ chances to retake the House, cut Donald Trump’s term in half, and spare our nation from the pain many have endured since January 2025.”

Advertisement

During a press conference on March 2, Gov. Gavin Newsom said that when he is out in communities, people aren’t talking about the governor’s race. It’s an observation he called “interesting,” considering voting in the primary election starts in May.

“It’s been hard, I think, to focus on that race,” Newsom said, pointing to the attention on President Donald Trump, redistricting, and other matters.

What exactly is California Democratic Party asking of candidates?

In his open letter, Hicks gave directions to candidates.

First, assess your candidacy and campaign. If you don’t have a viable path to the general election, don’t file to get your name on the ballot for the primary election in June. Also, be prepared to suspend your campaign and endorse another candidate by April 15 if you decide to file but can’t show “meaningful progress towards winning the primary election.”

Advertisement

When is the next California election? Primary election in 2026

California voters will trim the field of candidates for governor on June 2. Only the two candidates who receive the most votes, regardless of party preference, will move on to the November election.  

Paris Barraza is a reporter covering Los Angeles and Southern California for the USA TODAY Network. Reach her at pbarraza@usatodayco.com.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending