This entry for GB.1860.5 is descriptive of the additional UANs:

GB.1860.5’s cub GB.1860.5A

GB.1860.5’s cub GB.1860.5B

---

---

THIS MICROHISTORY TAKES PLACE ON OR INVOLVES THE ANCESTRAL LANDS OF THE MAIDU (INCLUDING THE Mountain Maidu, AND KOJOMK’AWI (KONKOW)), CAYUSE, UMATILLA, AND WALLA WALLA, AND NISENAN PEOPLES OF CALIFORNIA.

(Jump to article transcriptions)

---

This microhistory involves a family unit of multiple bears. GB.1860.5 was an adult Grizzly Bear killed by a party of hunters (“nimrods”) near the O’Hara mining claims abutting the town of Quincy, in Plumas County California, United States on April 13, 1860. Her two cubs, GB.1860.5A and GB.1860.5B (both dependent young or juvenile bears of unknown sex) survived but were orphaned and brought into captivity as a result of the event. As the events to which this microhistory refers describe the death of one Bear and the capture, domestication, or removal from the wild of two others, GB.1860.5, GB.1860.5A, and GB.1860.5B have been assigned Unique Animal Numbers (UANs). All are encounters which impact one or more predator agency physically, and are so classed as Tier 1 events. An initial, Tier 2 encounter (wherein no physical contact occurred regardless of proximity) which can be interpreted as pretext or motive for retaliatiatory or opportunistic pursuit on the basis of predator proximity to human settlement has also been included in the data.

GB.1860.5 and cubs were pursued by a party of multiple hunters after a chance encounter with a man named Mr. Shick, a miner, returning from the O’Hara mining claims, within approximately one mile of the town of Quincy. Shortly after noticing tracks on the trail, GB.1860.5 and Mr. Shick encountered each other on the trail in the Claremont Mountain foothills of the the Sierra Nevada Mountains of California as she rose into the bipedal position from (nonspecific) plants and underbrush. Shick drew his pocket knife and retreated. GB.1860.5 is not reported to have charged, and it is not clear whether cubs GB.1860.5A and GB.1860.5B were seen by Shick in this initial, Tier 2 encounter. Following Shick’s return to Quincy, the story spurred local interest and a hunting party (ostensibly armed with firearms) left in pursuit of GB.1860.5. The story was first published by the California newspaper the Plumas Standard and later recirculated in the Marysville Daily Appeal and the Daily National Democrat.¹

GB.1860.5 and cubs GB.1860.5A and GB.1860.5B’s relationship with seasonality is significant. That this microhistory occurs during the Spring or early spring describes a relationship to the period of den emergence following the winter rest period (torpor sleep, or hibernation) and the subsequent period of normal activity.² Its locus in the Sierra Nevada Forests ecoregion and the Temperate Conifer Forests biome may suggest dialogue with the historical populations of California Grizzly, an extinct subtype of Grizzly or North American Brown Bear with critical relationships to 19th Century settlement.³ The presence of mining infrastructure, associated extractivist activity and social groups of the American west may further describe a relationship between the microhistory these bears share and environmental or social stressors experienced by a broader local population.

While this microhistory refers to GB.1860.5 as a “trophy,”  and its events led to live capture of GB.1860.5A and GB.1860.5B, it is likely that this hunt and live capture event was incentivized by the potential for trade or sale. GB.1860.5A and GB.1860.5B have no known association to bloodsport, but future relationship to bloodsport is unknown.  

While a relationship between GB.1860.5 and maternity can be inferred from this microhistory and has been categorized as female, GB.1860.5 is referred to as male by the primary source material. It is highly unlikely that GB.1860.5 was male. Social bonds between male Grizzly bears and juvenile cubs have been documented, but these relationships are not typical.⁴ It is far more standard that adult male grizzlies pose a threat to, or predate upon, cubs.⁵ The gendering of GB.1860.5 should be critically read alongside the narrative qualities of nineteenth century newspapers, including their tendency to masculinize or feminize certain predator animals within anthropomorphic depictions. This is often typical of microhistories involving depictions of heroism.

This microhistory has neither a relationship to human fatality, nor human injury (although defensive responses are noted in cubs GB.1860.5A and GB.1860.5B in captivity, it is not expressly stated that human or domestic animal injury occurred). Local, relevant prey species are not specifically referenced.
It is not known to involve livestock animals. Health, weight, and length data are unknown for GB.1860.5, GB.1860.5A and GB.1860.5B.

---

CLICK TO EXPAND article transcription(s)

“Plumas County Items,” Marysville Daily Appeal, 14 April 1860.

“Plumas County Items. We clip the following items of news from the Plumas Standard of the 14th: Disagreeable Encounter. — As Mr. Shick, of this place, was returning from the O’Hara claims on the hill back of town, on yesterday, he encountered a large bear, which he thinks must have been a grizzly. When within about a mile of Quincy, Mr. S. Lost his way, and endeavoring to find the trail, he came across some tracks which he supposed would lead to it, following which he came to a clump of bushes from which emerged the bear. Rearing, at the sight of our hero, upon his hind legs, as if for a friendly greeting, whereupon Shick drew his pocket-knife, determined to make his best fight. Bruin, however, declined any further contest, and Shick, greatly relieved, south tracks in a different direction. It is fortunate that he escaped so readily. Once the above was written, our “Nimrods” who, immediately started on receipt of the intelligence, after the bear, have returned, bringing with them, as a trophy, the dead carcass of the venerable bruin with two of his progeny who were alive and kicking, and we might add, scratching, also.”

“Bear Killed,” Daily National Democrat, 21 April 1860.

“Bear Killed. — On the 13th inst., in the vicinity of Quincy, Plumas county, a Mr. Shiek suddenly came upon a large grizzly bear, which, emerging from a clump of bushes, stood upon its hind legs before the intruder. The Plumas Standard says that Shiek drew his pocket knife, determined to make his best fight. Bruin, however, declined a contest, and Shiek, greatly relieved, made tracks in a different direction. On the receipt of this intelligence, the ‘Nimrods’ of Quincy sallied out, killed the bear, and captured two of his cubs.”

---

THIS MICROHISTORY IS NOT CURRENTLY IN DIALOGUE WITH ANY OTHER ENTRIES ON PMN.

---

Notes

1. “Plumas County Items,” Marysville Daily Appeal, April 20 1860, Volume I, Number 77 (Marysville, CA); reprinted as facsimile “Plumas County Items,” Marysville Daily Appeal, April 21, 1860, Volume I, Number 78, (Marysville, CA); “Bear Killed,” Daily National Democrat, April 21, 1860. Volume 4, Number 60, (Marysville, CA); “Disagreeable Encounter,” Plumas Standard (Plumas Argus), April 14 1860, (Quincy, CA). Digital record of the original Plumas Standard article is not available at this time. 1860 U.S. Census data confirms a miner, Philip L Shick living in Plumas County, California. The gender of hunting party members is not explicitly stated, but is likely to have been dominantly male.
2. For more details, see “5 Stages of Activity and Hibernation.” North American Bear Center.
3. Alexis M. Mychajliw et al., “Coupled Social and Ecological Change Drove the Historical Extinction of the California Grizzly Bear (Ursus arctos californicus),” Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 291, no. 2014 (2024): 20230921.
4. Relationships between male Grizzly bears and juvenile cubs are socially risk-intensive, but anecdotal accounts, including among certain male bears at Katmai National Park and Preserve, support a close reading of these relationships beyond the literature.
5. N. S. Libal et al., “Despotism and Risk of Infanticide Influence Grizzly Bear Den-Site Selection,” PLoS ONE 6, no. 9 (September 14, 2011): e24133, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0024133.

---

Cite This Page

Chicago

Caroline Abbott. “GB.1860.5; GB.1860.5A; GB.1860.5B.” Predator Microhistory Network. [Accessed Month, Day, Year].

MHRA

Caroline Abbott, ‘GB.1860.5; GB.1860.5A; GB.1860.5B’, Predator Microhistory Network. [Accessed Day Month Year]

MLA

Abbott, Caroline. “GB.1860.5; GB.1860.5A; GB.1860.5B.” Predator Microhistory Network, 3 September, 2025. [Accessed Day Month Year].

APA

Abbott, C. 2025, September 3. GB.1860.5; GB.1860.5A; GB.1860.5B. Predator Microhistory Network.

Feature image: Detail of Arthur Keddie’s 1892 map of Plumas County, California focusing on the town of Quincy (including mining claims). Public Domain, Library of Congress.

---