The Brief

It had been five years since the first of the frog eggs had been moved, carefully plucked from Mexico's Baja Peninsula and transported by cooler to Southern California. Anny Peralta-Garcia was getting nervous.

The eggs belonged to California red-legged frogs, an amphibian that had been eaten, bulldozed and eventually pushed out of the state decades earlier. Peralta-Garcia, an Ensenada-based conservation biologist, had helped harvest fresh eggs from a pond in Baja. The efforts to move them back to the frogs' historic range in California had been monumental — involving private landowners, federal agencies, conservation groups, helicopters and an international border.

And now, 87 more moved egg masses later, everyone was waiting to see if it worked. If the re-introduced frogs were breeding.

"We were like, OK, if frogs reach sexual maturity in two years, maybe three, maybe four, we should be seeing something," Peralta-Garcia says. "But then, third year, fourth year, nothing."

California red-legged frogs lay hundreds of eggs, like these in Baja California. Because of natural attrition and predation, fewer than 1% of eggs survive to the tadpole phase, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

(

Jorge Valdez

/

Fauno del Noroeste

)

Finally this year, the scientists tried something new to listen in on the frogs: artificial intelligence. A customized AI model sifted through thousands of hours of audio recordings from the relocation sites and picked out the sound of mature male frogs calling — grunting, more like — at their new location.

It was the first time the California red-legged frog had been heard in the wilds of San Diego County in 25 years, and a new egg mass soon followed.

It's the latest example of how new technologies like AI are helping muddy-boot biologists and wildlife conservationists fight an ever-worsening extinction crisis.

"It's been like an impossible dream since the '90s to actually be able to go out and see wild frogs at these sites again," says Robert Fisher, a biologist with the U.S. Geological Survey.
Here's how it happened.

The celebrated jumping frog of Calaveras County 

At about five inches, the California red-legged frog is the largest native frog species west of the Rocky Mountains. It used to be found in ponds and waterways, from northern Baja California to above the San Francisco Bay, with populations as far inland as the Sierra Nevada.

The frog's prevalence made it a popular food source in the 1800s and for miners during the California Gold Rush, says Bennett Hardy, an amphibian ecologist at the San Diego Natural History Museum. "It was kind of the hot cuisine at the time," he says.

The frog leaped to national fame with Mark Twain's short story The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calaveras County, which helped launch his writing career.

The California red-legged frog used to be prevalent in the wetlands and streams of coastal California before being displaced by invasive species, agriculture and other human development.

(

Paula Sternberg Rodriguez

/

San Diego Natural History Museum

)

But the next 150-or-so years weren't so great. Wetlands were drained for agriculture and homes. Streams were dammed, diseases struck and the American bullfrog, a fearsome predator and the largest native frog east of the Rocky Mountains, was introduced.

In 1996, the California red-legged frog was listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.

"It's now occupying less than 70% of its historic range," says Susan North, director of stewardship for the Nature Conservancy in California. That includes a stretch from Los Angeles to northern Baja California with zero populations.

"So that's a 260-mile gap in the range of the species," she says. "With a gap that size, you're not going to have five-inch frogs re-colonizing their range naturally."

A group that includes the Nature Conservancy was formed in the mid-2000s, and the decision was made to help bring them back. Genetic testing showed the frogs that used to live in Southern California most closely resembled remnant populations in Mexico.

"So in thinking about reintroducing frogs and bringing them back and restoring these ecosystems, it became clear we needed a Mexican source for the frogs," Fisher says.

Using coolers, the team of federal wildlife agencies and conservation groups have moved 87 California red-legged frog egg masses to new locations in Southern California.

(

Bradford Hollingsworth

/

San Diego Natural History Museum

)

In Mexico, Peralta-Garcia and her nonprofit Fauna del Noroeste set to work preserving the Baja Peninsula's last-remaining populations of red-legged frogs, restoring habitat and boosting their populations with the support of the U.S.-based groups.

Meanwhile, in Southern California, two sites with multiple water bodies were identified as suitable habitats in San Diego and Riverside counties. They were cleared of invasive, predatory bullfrogs.

In 2020, after a tangle of paperwork and permits, the first translocation took place.

"It was like planes, trains and automobiles," Fisher says. "It was just a lot of different moving parts."

An egg mass was moved by helicopter and car, down dirt roads and over the U.S. border to one of the prepared sites in Southern California. Others followed. The wait began.

Tasking AI to listen for frogs

The goal of a translocation, or assisted migration, is to either move a species back to a place it's been extirpated from, or to a more suitable habitat. The latter is becoming more relevant as the climate warms and ecosystems change.

For a relocation to be successful, the moved species needs to be able to survive on its own in its new environment. It needs to be self-sustaining. And to self-sustain, the frogs needed to be breeding.

During mating season, male frogs often call at night to warn other males or attract females.

(

Brad Nissen

/

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

)

The easiest way to know if frogs are breeding is by listening for their calls, says Hardy. "When frogs are calling, most of the time, that's the male of the species using those calls as an advertisement."

But trying to listen out for occasional nocturnal mating calls is tedious work. "I'd love to be out there every night at these ponds, with my tent and camping and trying to listen for them, but it's just not feasible," he says.

So instead Hardy and the team set up a series of microphones around the relocation sites.

The microphones recorded audio from dusk to dawn, day after day, week after week, collecting thousands of hours of audio during the frog's winter mating season.

But that led to a new problem. Hardy says they'd need an army of ears "to be able to sort through all these files and find where the frogs are."

To help reduce the time and effort, the team partnered with outside engineers to create a custom machine learning model — similar to the popular birding app Merlin — trained to sort through the data and detect the calls of two species: the California red-legged frog and their competitor, the non-native American Bullfrog.

Microphones set up around the relocation sites recorded the "sounds of the night," says Bennett Hardy, a researcher at the San Diego Natural History Museum.

(

Bradford Hollingsworth

/

San Diego Natural History Museum

)

It wasn't perfect at first. Hardy says that early on, the model flagged a call that it thought was a frog but was in fact a hooded merganser, a bird that's also known as the frog duck because its mating calls sound so similar to a frog's. But with time, they've been able to refine the model and are now working on a real-time alert system that will let biologists know instantaneously when a Bullfrog or red-legged frog is detected.

For Clark Winchell, a long-time muddy-boot biologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the technology has been revelatory.

"I spent countless hours by myself in a kayak listening for bullfrogs. It's not the most efficient use of time," he says. "What they've done with AI on this project is incredible. It's systematic monitoring of two species."

Using the model, earlier this winter, they were able to identify the grunts of a California red-legged frog. Soon after, a survey found a new gelatinous ball of fresh eggs near the microphone that recorded it.

North, who'd helped spearhead the effort for more than a decade, says it brought tears to her eyes. There's still work to do, she says. There's still a lot of gaps in the species' historic range.

But in some parts of Southern California, for the first time in decades, she says, "We're hearing them again."

Copyright 2025 NPR

If Proposition 3 looks familiar, it’s because this is the third time the income tax measure has appeared on California ballots. But this time might be the last.

Prop. 3 would permanently extend an income tax on the wealthy to fund schools, healthcare and other state services. It first appeared on the ballot as a temporary tax in 2012 to help schools through the Great Recession, and voters renewed it in 2016. Now, its supporters are asking voters to make it permanent before it expires in 2031.

“I can’t overstate how important this is,” said David Goldberg, president of the California Teachers Association, the state’s largest teachers union and a primary supporter of the measure. “It’s only a tax on the wealthiest Californians, but it’s vital for our schools.”

Prop. 3 would extend a tax on individuals who earn more than $371,000 or couples who earn more than $743,000 annually. It generated between $5 billion and $15 billion a year, fluctuating with the stock market, interest rates and other factors that affect the income of the state’s top earners.

Top earners would continue paying an income tax rate of 12.3% if the measure passes. Tack on the state’s additional 1% tax on income over $1 million for mental health services and California’s highest-earners wind up with an income tax rate of 13.3%, the highest in the nation.

The bulk of the money would be funnelled through the state’s Proposition 98 funding mechanism, which guarantees 40% of the state budget be set aside for K-12 schools and community colleges. If the money surpasses a certain level, the extra would go toward a budget rainy day fund.

Prop. 3 would also pay for healthcare and other services because it frees up money the state would ordinarily spend on schools for other services, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office. Of the Prop. 98 money, 89% goes to K-12 schools and 11% goes to community colleges.

In flush years, the income tax makes up about 15% of the state’s overall K-12 education budget. If it doesn’t pass, school districts will be forced to lay off up to 50,000 teachers and make other cuts, Goldberg said.

Union’s big push

The teachers union is aggressively supporting the measure. It collected thousands of signatures to win a spot on the ballot and sent members to knock on more than 200,000 doors throughout the state. Goldberg described the campaign as “one of our biggest, most ambitious efforts yet.”

The powerful union as well as other groups have raised more than $40 million to pass Prop. 3. Opponents, which include taxpayer associations, have raised $5,500.

The measure appears to have an edge with voters. According to a Public Policy Institute of California poll conducted in September, 58% of likely voters said they planned to vote yes on the measure. Among Democrats, 82% said they favored it, while 18% of Republicans said they did.

Prop. 3 is not the only tax-the-rich measure on the Nov. 3 ballot. Proposition 40 would levy a 5% tax on Californians with assets of more than $1 billion, with 90% of the money going toward healthcare and the rest divided between schools, food assistance programs and other services. The teachers union opposes Prop. 40 because it argues schools wouldn’t receive enough of the money, Goldberg said.

“We’re not campaigning against Prop. 40. We’re just prioritizing Prop. 3,” Goldberg said.

The union decided to put the measure on the ballot now, more than four years before the current tax expires, because schools typically plan their budgets many years in advance and need plenty of advance warning of significant changes in revenues, Goldberg said.

‘Not sustainable’

Susan Shelley, vice president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association, questioned whether schools need more money, considering the state’s recent investments and declining enrollment.

“We have fewer and fewer students. Does this mean we need fewer teachers? Maybe it does,” Shelley said. “It’s time to revisit some of these costs. Some districts have unaffordable labor contracts, fewer students … It’s not sustainable.”

In addition, she said, California already has the highest personal income tax rate – 13.3% – in the country. Adding more will only drive the wealthiest residents – and their money – from the state, which will have a disproportionate impact on state revenues, she said. According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the state’s top 2% of earners pay about half the state’s income taxes.

California’s K-12 enrollment has declined steadily for at least a decade, with schools losing more than 500,000 students since the mid-2010s. Families are having fewer children, immigration is down and many families have left California because of the high cost of living.

Still, California has among the country’s highest student-to-teacher ratios. In 2022-23, California had one teacher for every 22 students, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. The national average was 1:15. In New York, it was just over 1:11.

That’s why California schools need more money, said Rob Manwaring, senior policy and fiscal adviser at the advocacy group Children Now.

“Those ratios mean that students who need extra help aren’t getting it, which is why we have such a large achievement gap in California,” Manwaring said. “It’s dire.”

He also noted that federal budget cuts will continue affecting California, including its schools, and the state will need revenue to backfill those costs. The chance of an economic downturn in the next few years will also imperil school funding.

“No one wants to project out too far, but schools might see some very tight budgets,” Manwaring said.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

The state workers who are planning the first-ever statewide walkout in 44 years this week once were on much better terms with their boss, Gov. Gavin Newsom.

SEIU Local 1000, state government’s largest union, kicked in one of the single biggest checks to Newsom’s 2018 campaign, a $500,000 contribution. It followed up with $1 million more to help Newsom fend off a recall in 2021.

That alliance made sense for the union, especially considering that Newsom’s Republican opponents were much less friendly to labor.

But today the two sides are far apart with Local 1000 preparing its first statewide strike since signing its first collective bargaining agreement in 1982 as it accuses Newsom of bad-faith bargaining. Its members are trolling Newsom online with memes likening him to infamous Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes, caricaturing him as a sci-fi villain and mocking his presidential ambitions.

What happened to the labor love fest?

At the bottom line, Newsom was stingier with public employees than voters who think of him as a labor-aligned Democrat might assume. He demanded wage reductions from state workers over three years of his tenure and limited raises to 3% in financially flush times. He also took a hard line in calling employees back to the office four days a week after many grew accustomed to working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic.

“The fact the state has refused to bargain in good faith is what got so many members active,” said Anica Walls, president of Local 1000. The union represents about 100,000 workers. “They’re just kind of tired of always feeling the budget is balanced on state employees’ backs.”

That feeling goes back more than 20 years for some California public employees. Like many workers, they accepted furloughs and wage reductions during the Great Recession. That period lasted from 2008 to 2013 under former governors Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jerry Brown. But Brown then pressed for more concessions, including an additional paycheck deduction to fund retiree healthcare and higher worker contributions toward pensions.

Union leaders had high hopes Newsom would end the trend of temporary pay cuts and givebacks, as shown by the campaign contributions he gained in 2018.

It didn’t work out that way.

Here’s a look at some of the issues that led the state’s largest public employee union to break with Newsom and put him on the spot with its first statewide strike.

Money, money, money

California state government spending surged during the Newsom administration, climbing from $201.4 billion in the 2018-19 financial year to $321 billion in Newsom’s 2025-26 budget. That’s a 59% increase.

Payroll is up, too, but at a slower rate. Compensation for state workers hit $25.2 billion in 2025, about 32% more than 2019.

To be sure, Newsom gave bonuses to many public employees — especially prison staff — when the state was flush with money just after the pandemic. But he’s been thriftier with wage increases. They topped out 3% in most contracts.

Meanwhile, Newsom at two key moments pressed public employees to accept pay cuts. The first happened in the panic of the early pandemic when the governor braced for a severe recession. Unions agreed to wage cuts of roughly 9% and in exchange workers received days off that they could save and bank for later.

The second wage cut happened in 2025 when the governor sought to close a severe budget deficit. Most unions, including Local 1000, again accepted deals for two years of wage reductions in exchange for days off. They also agreed to defer raises until next year.

One union did not accept those terms, the California Association of Professional Scientists. The scientist union was the first to strike against Newsom, holding a three-day walkout in 2023. It viewed the contract it negotiated in 2024 as critical, and it didn’t want to give up its raises when Newsom asked.

But, just before an agreed-upon raise was supposed to take effect last summer, it learned that the state budget didn’t include money for the wage increase.

The conflict again angered public employees who expected a pay boost. The union appealed to state lawmakers, who funded the raises in a follow-on spending bill.

“We negotiated that collective bargaining agreement in good faith and believe a deal is a deal,” said the union’s vice president, Justin Garcia.

Working from home

California government changed overnight during the pandemic, when Newsom ordered employees to work from home unless the nature of their job required them to report to a prison or state hospital. That was a major cultural adjustment for a bureaucracy known for time cards, rigid schedules and a refusal to pay for workers’ office parking.

The Newsom administration commended workers for making the change and it publicized a dashboard that showed state employees were just as efficient at home as they were in the office.

But as time passed Newsom said he grew concerned that remote work stifled the in-person collaboration that he argued was important for a successful organization. He called employees back to the office two days a week in 2024, and four days a week beginning last summer.

Many state workers want more flexibility. They point to a 2025 state audit that found the state could save $225 million a year by allowing more remote work.

Retirement plans diverge

State workers hired before 2013 have a better retirement deal than public employees who joined since then. That issue is not front-and-center in the Local 1000 strike, but it’s bubbling up as newer workers learn about their colleagues’ benefits.

Former Gov. Brown championed the law that trimmed pension benefits. It came out of the Great Recession, which caused California’s major pension funds to hemorrhage billions of dollars and highlighted a generous pension enhancement that former Gov. Gray Davis had signed into law a dozen years earlier.

Now, public employees work longer and pay more of their own income toward their pensions. Newsom last month vetoed a bill that would have sweetened retirement formulas for police and firefighters, a proposal that likely will return to Newsom’s successor in the near future.

“What people thought before was a cush state job because we had good retirement, the ability to retire with a pension, that does not look the same to people who came after 2013,” said Walls, the Local 1000 president.

Where else can they go?

Local 1000 and other state government unions might be frustrated with Newsom, but they tend to get a better hearing from Democrats than Republicans. Schwarzenegger, after all, championed four failed ballot measures that would have stripped them of their power and influence.

“They (unions) have to make converts in the church in which they worship,” said Don Perata, a union-aligned Democrat and former Senate president pro tem who battled with Schwarzenegger.

He praised Local 1000 members for carrying state government through the pandemic and for taking on difficult jobs to serve Californians. He recognized governors and lawmakers have to pass balanced budgets, and said that means they should be more careful in running up the cost of programs that might eat away at funding that could be used to pay public employees better.

“It’s past time to show there’s recognition and not just by blowing smoke at them,” Perata said.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

This story first appeared on Long Beach Post.

Two upcoming events at Long Beach City College will give Long Beach residents the chance to stockpile sandbags in advance of what is expected to be a particularly strong El Niño season.

On Saturday, Oct. 24, residents can pick up sandbags for free at the LBCC Trades, Technology and Community Learning Campus (1305 E Pacific Coast Highway). A second distribution will be held on Saturday, Nov. 7, in Lot M of the Liberal Arts College (4901 E. Carson St.). Each event runs from 8 a.m. to 2 p.m., and community members will be able to drive up to the distribution sites, where staff will help them fill their cars with up to 10 sandbags. IDs will not be required to receive sand and sandbags.

At a recent press conference amid the waves fueled by Tropical Storm Rachel, Mayor Rex Richardson emphasized that residents all across Long Beach will likely feel the effects of storms and flooding this El Niño season.

“Do not be caught off guard,” he said. “Prepare right now.”

The Peninsula has already endured catastrophic damage — a dozen families lost their homes in the punishing waves of the most recent storm. Yet even if residents can’t see the ocean from their windows, experts predict the greater Long Beach area will see bursts of drenching rain carried by atmospheric rivers, large bands of water vapor. In turn, those rainstorms raise the risk of flash flooding, landslides and high tides.

Some of these effects will not be limited to the coast. Low-lying areas throughout Long Beach are especially susceptible to flooding, according to a city press release.

Richardson urged city residents to pick up sandbags before they need them — and to keep them throughout the rainy season, which typically lasts from December through March.

In addition to the upcoming distribution events, residents can also pick up empty sandbags at all neighborhood fire stations. (Station locations are available here.) Sand is available at stations 7, 12, 13 and 14, and residents are encouraged to bring shovels to fill sandbags themselves.

City officials encouraged community members to stay informed during the rainy season by signing up for Alert Long Beach and checking the city’s landing page for emergency updates. City Manager Tom Modica urged residents to take steps to fortify their properties, gather emergency supplies and develop plans for emergency weather.

Find additional resources on how to prepare for and navigate El Niño here.