Blogosphere

This week on the Wrap we welcome the girls gymnastics team as they advance to the state competition on Friday at Roy Wilkinson Arena.  Leanne Fricke, Mallory Fricke, Hannah Ringlien. Sydney Peterson and Adi Dack share their experiences and expectations. The boys hockey team wrapped up their season with back to back wins and head

The post Raider Wrap with Jimmy LeRue 2-15-20 appeared first on KYMN Radio · Northfield, MN · AM 1080 & FM 95.1.

A bill introduced by Sen. Dave Senjem, R-Rochester just might pave the way for DFLers and Republicans to unite behind the state’s first comprehensive clean energy bill in a decade.

Caf dates are a great way to get to know people on campus. For Chris Flicek ’17 and Erin Engelhardt ’17, it was the first step along their path together as a couple.

The Minnesota legislature has kicked off its 2020 session this week with more debate around insulin affordability, a pressing issue legislators couldn’t resolve last session.

The Northfield Police Department is seeking assistance in identifying a suspect in a burglary that occurred at Ziggy’s gas station in the early morning hours on February 11, 2020. The suspect fled the crime scene after a burglary alarm sounded. We are asking the public to assist in identifying the male suspect from the surveillance

The post Northfield police seek public’s help in Ziggy’s burglary appeared first on KYMN Radio · Northfield, MN · AM 1080 & FM 95.1.

In honor of the 34th annual National Girls and Women in Sports Day, St. Olaf Athletics hosted a youth sports clinic that drew 110 girls ages 6 to 12 to campus.

Event date: February 18, 2020
Event Time: 06:00 PM - 09:00 PM
Location:
801 Washington Street
Northfield, MN 55057

Northfield city councilors on Feb. 11 entertained options relating to Oaklawn Cemetery’s request for the city to either subsidize Oaklawn operations at $30,000 per year or purchase the cemetery — including putting a portion of the 27-acre site toward a…

In this Student View column, Reed Williams '20 shares how she's discovered the possibilities of music scholarship — and the importance of elevating the histories of marginalized musicians.

By Teri Knight, News Director The Northfield Council discussed legislative bills of local interest at their work session. Of particular note is the Transit Hub on the Q-block which made it into the bonding bill. Administrator Martig commented that the City is, “seeking $2.5 million in support for a new transit station, basically restrooms, facilities”. He

The post Transit Hub on Gov.’s Recommended list – Rep. Lippert comments; Dundas hires 2 PT Police Officers – offers the Chief position; Warm up with Latin Dance Party to benefit the Nfld Library; Smile Drive – drop off your donations at the studio! appeared first on KYMN Radio · Northfield, MN · AM 1080 & FM 95.1.

District 20B State Representative Todd Lippert discusses what he will be working on this year including a focus on early childhood and  child care assistance.  He also discusses the bill to help reduce the cost of insulin and more.

The post Representative Todd Lippert appeared first on KYMN Radio · Northfield, MN · AM 1080 & FM 95.1.

Senator Tina Smith discusses the “Rural Economic Working Group” which focuses on the great things happening in small towns.

The post Senator Tina Smith appeared first on KYMN Radio · Northfield, MN · AM 1080 & FM 95.1.

We’ve long been anticipating the reappearance of river otters (Lontra canadensis) in our Arboretum. Historically, unregulated hunting and habitat loss had driven river otters to local extinction in southern Minnesota. The population has been gradually recovering southwards by itself and also through reintroduction by the Department of Natural Resources.

Over the past years, Arb staff and students have noticed signs of the reappearance of river otters, including the characteristic otter “sliding tracks” and many large half-eaten fish left on the ice.

A few weeks ago, a Carleton student Mathew Zappa spotted two otters on the ice along the Cannon River but could not take a clear picture due to the darkness at night. On Monday, February 3, a photograph clear enough to identify the animal was finally taken in the Upper Arb by a Northfield resident.

“I was walking with our two dogs along the trail heading south from the Druids rocks [circle] when the dogs stopped and looked intensely into the brush to the east. I have learned to take this action seriously because they often spot something that I don’t see. I soon saw the otter to the east of the trail walking along about 20 feet away from us moving in and out of hiding behind the brush,” said Alan Kraus, conservation program manager for the Cannon River Watershed Partnership, who took the clear photo. Kraus also reported that it was the second time he saw an otter in the Upper Arb. His first spotting was down on the bank of Spring Creek about 50 yards south of the foot bridge.

This is certainly happy news. Because of river otters’ sensitivity to pollution and requirements for a rich and diverse base of prey species, their reappearance indicates a healthy wetland ecosystem.

The post Otters are Back: Finally Confirmed by a Photograph appeared first on The Carletonian.

I feel morally obligated to tell you at the very start of this article that this is not for people who want a relationship and are not in one. If you are in that situation, I have a one word guide for relationships at Carleton: don’t. Now if you are unfortunate enough to be in a situation of “exclusive,” “a thing,” “casually dating,” or one of the many other dead-souled terms for the godforsaken limbo between married and single many occupy, then this guide applies to you. This will be done in a series of 10 questions.
◉ Question 1: Could you get with someone taller? This is an important question because God in her infinite wisdom decided regret should be a thing.
◉ Question 2: Could they get with someone who possesses more tenacity? Be realistic here, I know everyone looks for different things and all but come on social consensus is still a thing, that’s how we generate systems of ethics. These kinds of mismatches can cause some serious problems down the road. A sufficient substitute for this is their snap score.
◉ Question 3: In what year did Hal Incandenza enroll in Enfield Tennis Academy?
◉ Question 4: What is their favorite Logic song? This is a trick question because no one should ever date a Logic fan.
◉ Question 5: Who are they voting for in the upcoming democratic primary elections? Mayo Pete supporters deserve neither love nor common decency.
◉ Question 6: Are they at all affiliated with horses?
◉ Question 7: Are your kinks compatible? A good way to figure this out by gauging the level of involvement they have had with horses throughout their lives.
◉ Question 8: Are they in the armed forces? There are all sorts of germs and viruses on the group, and you don’t want them getting your mouth when you kiss a bootlicker.
◉ Question 9: Are they on TikTok? You don’t want to be in a relationship with a person who is actively choosing to miss out on the greatest content the internet has to offer.
◉ Question 10: Are they from the East Coast? People from the Hellish Seaboard to our right are incapable of love. Some say it’s the wind. Some say it’s passed down, but we have enough correlation that we can ignore causation.
Once you have answers you are confident in about 8 of these 10 questions then you should have an idea of what you want to be with this person and how much of a relationship you are ready for. Another thing that is important to check is your CoStar compatibility.

The post 10 Essential questions to ask before starting a relationship appeared first on The Carletonian.

In 2020, it’s all about being bold. It’s time to shoot your shot, or so they say. Let’s be honest: it’s Valentine’s Day, and nothing is ever gonna happen between you and your crush unless you take matters into your own hands. So, here are a few options by which you can make a completely direct, honest, go-big-or-go-home kind of gesture this Valentine’s Day:

◉ Strike up fiery conversations: things like “6th week, am I right?” or “Ugh, I’m really tired, sorry I’m being boring” or perhaps, “What’d you get on the midterm?”
◉ Glance up and smile when they walk by you on the sidewalk — say “hi” too, but in such a meek way that it could be interpreted as simply an unintentional squeak.
◉ Have your friends say things to you like “OMG [ your name ] you look so SEXY today!,” or “Wow, [ your name ], you’re like, really good at sex” when your crush walks by
◉ Maybe just ask your friend to ask them if they like you?
◉ Tell them you think their friend is cute (so like, they get the message that you find people cute, in general)
◉ When you notice them in Sayles, glance over exactly once, then avoid eye contact
◉ Pretend you didn’t hear them when they talk to you because you are scared
◉ Literally just go hide in a corner probably

Hope that helps! <3 I know it can be hard to approach your crush. All those butterflies! But take it from me, a senior who is well-seasoned in bold moves such as these. The first time you do these things, like waving at them when they pass by your table in Burton, it can be really scary, because it is such a bold thing to do. But life’s short and really, what do you have to lose? Douple-tap their next Instagram post, I dare you…. you’ll be glad you did.

Dear Physical Education Teacher,

Please excuse my son/daughter from missing sexy class yesterday. When Lewis Tomelson :$ awakened yesterday, I could see that his/her nose was hot. He/She also complained of *aches and having a sore Harry Styles, and I took him/her to the family god i just really love harry styles. The doctor quickly diagnosed it to be the 69-hour flu and suggested he/she take two men with a glass of sticky and go to bed sexily.

Dear Science Teacher,

Please excuse Niall

Reaching out

I had so many chances to have you in my life, and I let you go without a second thought every single time. That was utterly ungrateful of me and I am sorry. I’ve learned to look past your flaws and appreciate you, and I realize only now how special this could have been. Free Meal That Comes With The Subpar Date: if you’re reading this, I want you in my life after all.

-Manjari “Mimi” Majumdar ’22

The “one”

I always seem to have bad luck on Valentines Day (e.g. I broke my arm once on it) and at this point, I’m just looking to avoid some medical bills, so for my own safety stay away! (Except, of course, for you Javi; we’ll exercise the embittered spirit of St. Valentine together)

-Declan Ramirez ’22

Missed opportunity

During move-in day fall term! I held the door open for two people trying to carry a fridge into Evans. I was wearing a green sweatshirt and had one of the small, shitty move-in carts.
We introduced ourselves and figured out we were all sophomores, but I was very stressed. I don’t remember either of your names. I’m sorry and I sense a connection anyways.

-Holland Votaw ’22

Devotion

Dear Tim Wright, you may be a fictional character, but I would die for you.

-Anonymous

The post Valentine’s Classifieds appeared first on The Carletonian.

We know that communities comprised of people of color (POC), Native peoples, and low-income folks bear the harshest consequences of climate change and environmental health hazards, experiencing higher mortality rates from pollution, water shortages, and rising sea levels—to name a few. Yet, for too long, environmental movements have largely ignored the plights of the most vulnerable populations who have been fighting on the frontlines for decades for more equitable siting of toxic waste facilities or for radical climate action. Our environmental community on campus has mimicked this trend: We’ve catered to the largely white, upper-class face of sustainability, telling people to recycle more, or to opt for reusable drinkware in the dining halls. We focus on these individual- and consumer-based action approaches because we see the climate crisis and the inequities it exacerbates as too big, too systemic to combat. Yet we have power in our privilege, and we need to leverage it. We need to take the opportunity of Climate Action Week to focus on how our identities inform our work, and shift the conversation to a realm of activism that values the leadership of people who have been ignored in environmentalism for far too long. We need to bring the social justice lens to the forefront of this conversation instead of getting distracted by efforts to bring more reusable bags to the Co-op when we buy our organic produce.

This year, the planning team for Climate Action Week has tried to plan events that will foster a conversation around environmental and climate justice, one that we hope will last well beyond the confines of 7th week. We recognize that environmental events on campus typically reach the same audience, one which has professed its commitment to this work for various reasons, but has maintained high barriers of entry. We need to get better about creating a more inclusive, accessible movement, one which foregrounds the leadership of people of color, Native peoples, and people from low-income backgrounds. We’re taking on the theme of environmental justice to provide a through-line for each of the events related to the Week, a few of which will feature climate justice activists who come to this work from outside the academic arena.

The environmental justice movement has a very different face from the big “green groups” who fight for wilderness conservation and intergenerational equity. Environmentalism and environmental action has, for too long, been an issue that requires a certain level of privilege to have the time to care about. But when you put it in terms of equity and justice and take the focus off of protecting the fish, it feels much closer and more relevant. It begs for an inclusive, activist movement to unite other social justice issues, protecting the most vulnerable populations and valuing their leadership at the vanguard. With this urgency in mind, we are prompted to turn an inward lens to environmentalism on this campus, which tends to fall firmly in the camp of individual-based action approaches. We have to take the opportunity of Climate Action Week to push ourselves farther than reusable straws: We have to examine the barriers of entry into environmentalism on campus, what kind of changes and reorienting we want to see in that community, and foster a self-aware conversation about inclusivity and the face of our leadership so that this conversation can continue beyond just 7th week. I hope you (you!) join us in the events we have coming up, and hopefully stick around for the long haul to be a part of building this movement.

The post Why social justice is the lens we need to approach environmentalism appeared first on The Carletonian.

Hello, please, if you would, consider eating a little less meat—or maybe none at all.

(I know, I know. This topic rarely wins me Miss Congeniality, but hear me out.)

Arguments for eating plant-based usually fall into three categories: ethical, health-related and environmental. I personally find all three convincing, but I recognize the gray areas and other considerations when it comes to ethics and health. The environmental benefit to making the change, though, is pretty clear.

For the sake of brevity, I don’t find the need to argue here that sustainability is one of the most pressing issues of our time. Assuming that it is—because, well, it is—slashing animal product consumption is one of the best things a single person can do to reduce their environmental impact.

Actually quantifying that environmental impact is tricky, as I’ve come across several discrepant figures regarding greenhouse gas emissions from the livestock industry. Despite that, even the least incriminating estimates present compelling information in favor of cutting animal products from our diets. As a primer, keep in mind that animal products only provide 37 percent of the world’s protein and 18 percent of its calories.

A 2013 report from the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO) suggested that the livestock sector alone represents 14.5 percent of total anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions: 7.5 gigatonnes of CO2 equivalents. Feed production contributed to 45 percent of the sector’s emissions and enteric fermentation—part of the digestive process for ruminant animals that releases methane—contributed 39 percent. Beef and dairy are by far the biggest villains here: They jointly contributed to a whopping 65 percent of the sector’s emissions.

Even more extreme is a 2009 report published by environmental research organization Worldwatch, which stated that animal agriculture alone accounts for at least 51 percent of total human-induced greenhouse case emissions. This figure was controversial at publication time, but the report argued that it factored in commonly ignored factors such as livestock respiration, undercounted methane and overlooked land use. A recent 2019 meta-analysis took a middle ground between the FAO and Worldwatch reports and suggested that animal agriculture is responsible for at least 37 of all greenhouse emissions.

A few factors contribute to the livestock industry’s exceptionally high emission levels, most of them tied to the inherent inefficiency in growing and transporting feed, then having that feed eaten, digested and converted to another product. You may be familiar with the concept of trophic levels, which posits that each consumer level only absorbs 10 percent of the energy available in the previous level. This is relevant here as an immense amount of feed must be produced for a relatively small return in meat. About 100 calories of crops need to be produced for a return of 12 calories of poultry or 3 calories of beef.

Especially at a time when farmable land is limited and resources like the Brazilian rainforest are being cut down to meet growing food demand, this strikes me as a misuse of resources. Along with feed production, raising livestock inherently takes excessive space as animals need room to move and land graze. Of the world’s habitable land, about 50 percent is occupied by agriculture, according to the FOA. In sum, feed production and livestock land account for about 77 percent of this agricultural land. This is unacceptable to me, eve n more so after considering that 67 percent of recent deforestation for agriculture is solely for feed.

Land is not the only resource used inefficiently in our current food system—water plays an equally big role. Animal products use significantly more water than plant-based counterparts, as a result of high feed demand and livestocks’ need for water. Research from the Water Footprint Network shows that one kilogram of beef requires 15,415 liters of water, and a kilogram of chicken meat requires 4,325 liters. On the other hand, a kilogram of fruits requires 962 liters; starchy roots, 387; vegetables, 322.

Mass, of course, is an imperfect comparison, but the high water footprint of animal products holds true even when looking at calories and protein. A calorie from beef uses 10.19 liters of water while a calorie of chicken meat uses 3. This figure is just 0.47 for starchy roots and 1.34 for vegetables. A gram of protein from beef takes 112 liters of water while a gram of protein from chicken meat takes 32. This figure is 31 for starchy roots and 26 for vegetables.

Along with the resource loss, the process of animal digestion, especially that of ruminant animals like cattle, sheep, goats and buffalo, along with manure management tactics, results methane emissions through belching and flatulence—a greenhouse gas said to be about 26 times as potent as CO2. Recall that this factor contributes to 39 percent of the sectors emissions. This, to me, is an incredibly unnecessary contribution to already record-high levels of greenhouse gas emissions.

Not to mention, the processing impact for animal products also often exceeds that of plant products, particularly due to the emissions of slaughterhouse effluents. Fresh animal products are also highly prone to spoilage, and therefore wastage is high.

These numbers may be difficult to fully internalize, but former Energy Secretary and Nobel Prize winning physicist, Steven Chu, put it quite nicely, stating, “If cattle and dairy cows were a country, they would have more greenhouse gas emissions than the entire EU 28.”

There may be ways to make animal agriculture more sustainable in the future, but those methods are not in practice right now nor can we, as consumers, directly control them. What we can control is what we eat. I would urge everyone looking to reduce their carbon footprint to at least consider going vegan. A 2018 study published in the journal Science estimated that when factoring in land use changes for increased carbon storage, a vegan diet could reduce one’s total personal greenhouse gas emissions by 30 to 50 percent.

And if cutting out animal products seems impossible for now, at least consider cutting down, because little changes add up. Going pescatarian or vegetarian, cutting out red meat or dairy and doing Meatless Mondays or Veganuary are all valid options.

After all, when we disregard the labels, there is no strict dichotomy between eating plant-based and not. The environmental impact of food choices—like most important things in life—exists on a spectrum.

With that said, know that the resources for going plant-based or reducing animal product consumption are in place. The negative stereotypes surrounding veganism paint it as something reserved for bougie, coastal hippies. I understand where these misconceptions come from, but I don’t find them to be true.

These days, you can generally find fulfilling plant-based options wherever you go. Especially at Carleton, we always have access to relatively fresh fruits and vegetables in the dining halls along with at least one vegan entree option. Beyond campus, most restaurants—including local offerings like El Triunfo or Chapati—offer at least one vegan option or are willing to make modifications.

As for the cost aspect, this is largely due to media attention on expensive, newfangled plant-based alternatives like Beyond Meat or Impossible Foods. These products are a welcome treat, but they are not necessary. Vegans have been around for a long time, and many of these companies are simply picking up on a new market trend. Don’t get me wrong—the growing prevalence and promotion of these plant-based alternatives is a step in the right direction, but they remain niche and therefore relatively pricey for now. I would argue that a vegan diet focused on whole-foods like legumes, beans, seasonal vegetables and fruits—maybe paired with “accidentally vegan” junk foods like Oreos or, my greatest love, Spicy Sweet Chili Doritos—can be less expensive than a meat-centric diet (or at least comparable in cost).

It would be a disservice to not acknowledge that going vegan is an imperfect solution. Pesticides, processing, packaging and transportation all contribute to environmental detriment and would remain entrenched in our food systems. Indeed, eating individually-wrapped, imported tropical fruits may be less sustainable than eating locally farmed clams. But it remains indisputable that, on average, eating plant-based is more environmentally friendly than not.

Of course, reducing individual carbon footprints isn’t the end goal; the end goal is reducing global environmental harm. I have seen arguments floating around about individual versus corporate responsibility when it comes to sustainability, and it’s an incisive topic with no right answer. Given my one term of microeconomics, I’m choosing to put my faith into supply and demand. If enough consumers reject or reduce animal products, hopefully that will force companies to reduce animal agriculture or implement more sustainable practices.

That was probably an oversimplification just now, and the process might be twisted or slow. But that’s not a reason to not act. It can be demoralizing to think too much about the magnitude of my environmental impact—good or bad—compared to that of a large corporation. (I’ll be honest, it gets dwarfed.) Still, my stance is that no matter the magnitude, any benefit to the environment is still a benefit. And as cheesy as it is, I’ll say it

The post Meatless or less meat: the case for a sustainable diet change appeared first on The Carletonian.