Breaking news from the Daily Prophet: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 will be shown in Science Lecture Hall 123 tonight. Doors open at 8 p.m. and the show starts at 8:30 p.m.
Entertainment Council is hosting the event, and tickets will cost $2 at the door. Muggles and wizards alike are encouraged to attend.
The most recent report from the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) states that California is no longer the most energy-efficient state in the United States. According to the report from the private research group, Massachusetts is now the country’s most efficient state followed by California, New York, Oregon and Washington, respectively.
California held the top spot for the last four years, so what does this decrease in rank say about the state’s energy efficiency?
“Personally, I prefer us [California] being number two. It’s a wake-up call, it makes us try harder,” said Benjamin Finkelor, executive director at the UC Davis Energy Efficiency Center.
Finkelor said that California has a reputation for being a leader when it comes to energy efficiency and outspends many other states.
According to Finkelor, there are three contributing factors to California’s high status in energy efficiency: codes and standards, energy efficiency programs — such as rebate programs — and nice weather.
“The codes and standards California has are the most aggressive in the country,” Finkelor said. “The energy efficiency bill started in California, some will even say it started in Davis.”
Finkelor said that the state’s combination of prescriptive and performance-based rebate programs encourages manufacturers and retailers to be energy efficient. When it comes to the aggressive codes and standards California has, he said it started decades ago.
“It started in the 1970s when refrigeration was required to become more efficient,” Finkelor said.
He pointed out that appliance standards are crucial because they force the manufacturer to care about the ultimate price the consumer pays, which is especially important, since in the end consumers are the ones paying the bills.
Finkelor said that a great help to California’s energy efficiency has come through the Public Goods Charge (PGC) — the small fee that California residents see in their monthly utility bills.
“Eighty percent of money collected from the PGC is spent on rebates and programs that help energy efficiency,” Finkelor said.
Unfortunately, California legislature did not renew the PGC earlier this year, meaning it will expire at the end of 2011.
“Not continuing that [PGC], or some form of continued investment in both Research and Development, and incentive rebates arguably puts us at a disadvantage,” Finkelor said.
Finkelor said that there is no reason to suggest that the state could not implement a similar program through regulation instead of law, and Gov. Jerry Brown has even asked that some sort of PGC be instituted in any way possible.
Alan Meier, associate director and senior scientist at the UC Davis Energy Efficiency Center, believes that too much emphasis should not be placed in the report from the ACEEE.
“The choice of programs taken into account, and the weighting assigned to each of them, is to some extent subjective,” Meier said.
Even though the report has California ranked lower than it previously was, Meier views it optimistically.
“The good news is that many more states have ratcheted up their energy efficiency programs and are reducing consumers’ energy bills,” Meier said.
He said that it is difficult to ascertain the reason for the change in ranking for California, but that California cannot be stagnant.
“The ACEEE scorecard is a signal to California — from the governor to the legislature to the utilities to the regulators — that they cannot be complacent,” Meier said. “Saving energy requires constant updates to policies, technical innovations and information to consumers.”
According to the report from ACEEE, total national budgets for electricity efficiency increased from $3.4 billion dollars in 2009 to $4.5 billion in 2010, showing that energy efficiency is taking an ever greater importance.
ERIC C. LIPSKY can be reached at science@theaggie.org.
Once upon a delightful time, when Borders still existed and life was thus full of sunshine and rainbows, I was geeking out in the sci-fi section when a book suctioned my attention faster than a vacuum eats hair clips.
As always, I skimmed the back, then flipped the book open to examine the barcode on the upper left corner of the inside flap. $24.99.
The shadows of depression descended upon me, leaving me in the mood for careful cognition. What does $24.99 really mean?
My mind reeled. I love to read, but I also have an unfortunate obsession with smoothies, and a 32-ounce Juice It Up Big Berry Combo is worth $5.25. I pulled out my cell phone for a quick calculation. Shoot! I could get 4.76, I mean four … or almost five smoothies for that much! Wait, is that good?
Rather than my book, I just got a headache and general displeasure with the ways of our world, which only worsened as I pondered the value of $24.99.
What is the true value of money, anyway? Can it even be determined? Is a dollar really just worth a dollar for everybody? Is a poor man’s dollar analogous to a penny in the eyes of a wealthier man? And most importantly, is money merely tangible pieces of paper and metal?
No, I decided, a few hours and aspirins later. Money is both concrete and abstract.
Physically, a dollar is a reified piece of paper. Its worth comes from people, since it is the people who assign and accept its “value”.
Conceptually, it is a means by which we get what we want. After all, before the development of standardized currencies, humans traded certain goods to get others. Now we do the same, only we trade commonly-recognized bills for the items we desire.
In today’s world, money equates success and success equates happiness. So according to the transitive property, money is happiness. We were raised with this logic. Our parents sent us to schools not solely to learn, but also to ensure that we will use our knowledge to unlock future opportunities, then successes and steady salaries.
The purpose of school is, indirectly, money. The ultimate purpose of life is money — to make money, to have money, to spend money.
I’ve recently resented being pulled into the vortex of this imprisoning, dream-devastating system. Yet it is so deeply entrenched in my mind that I find myself unable to wrench it out.
Perhaps my biggest hypocrisy is my hatred of hypocrisy. I have always admired individuals who had the courage not only to dream, but to pursue their dreams. Unfortunately, I cannot honestly say I am one of them.
I came to Davis with plans to major in neurobiology, physiology and behavior. I then decided to be “wise” and switch to biomedical engineering.
But the truth is, I want nothing more than to be an English major — and no matter how much I pretend, no matter how well I act, I will never be able to completely fool myself.
I have mildly enjoyed, tolerated and suffered through enough nerve-grating, hair-whitening classes with the promise of success guiding me, serving as the light at the end of this dark, disorienting tunnel of college.
But why should I set myself up for a career I’ll hate? Would I really prefer that to a lower-paying job that actually incites my interest and passion?
I now understand the power of the American dollar. Money has not only purchasing power, but also the power to enhance or distort sentimental values through illusions of worth. It has the power to drive some to happiness and others to despair; to incite peace or war; to save lives or end them; to build or destroy; to shape viewpoints and futures for better or worse.
The dollar may be a flimsy piece of paper, but it truly is potent.
So what really is money? Is it a goal, a sign of success, happiness, power, or lack thereof? Is it, or does it lead to, good or bad?
Individual sentiments toward money may differ based on many factors such as culture, religion, social status and ethnic background, but the fact is that money is a multifaceted pain in the behind that is not always worth all of the worry it costs.
Sometimes it’s okay to indulge and get the book and the smoothie. I think I will!
Tell ZENITA SINGH what you think about money at zensingh@ucdavis.edu.
What were your preconceptions about UC Davis, and how has that changed since you got here?
When I was first considering the job of chancellor, I spoke with many colleagues around the country who told me that UC Davis was a university with a great past and an even greater future. Of course, I knew it was a premier institution. And when I arrived here in August of 2009, I anticipated the strength and the quality of this university, as well as its potential.
As I begin my third academic year here, I believe that the potential for UC Davis is even greater than I thought it was in the beginning. Our outstanding faculty, students and staff thrive in a uniquely collaborative environment that encourages a spirit of innovation. That has not only been a pleasant surprise, but also a source of great excitement.
When I first arrived, I was concerned about a number of acts of intolerance that occurred on a campus historically known for its civility. But we responded quickly and the community has enthusiastically embraced our hate-free campus initiative and our efforts to encourage a more inclusive campus. Last week’s very successful Civility Project is a good example of that.
Another source of deep satisfaction is the tremendous amount of support our university receives from the city of Davis and other neighboring communities. Developing and maintaining strong relationships with the community is essential for any institution to be able to progress and move forward. At UC Davis, we are a close-knit community and we have a shared vision of where we want to go. I am delighted to see that these relationships are in place here and I look forward to achieving excellence as we continue to work together. I am enjoying the job of chancellor; serving this campus and this community provides a great deal of satisfaction – more so than I’d ever imagined.
Do you have a question for the chancellor? E-mail campus@theaggie.org.
With the World Series now over (congrats to UC Davis alumnus and Cardinals’ shortstop Daniel Descalso on becoming a world champion) the attention of the American sports public is pointed directly at the NFL.
Every NFL team has a distinct reputation, and with those reputations comes comparisons.
So, without further ado, here is a rundown of which NFL teams correspond to squads in UC Davis athletics.
UC Davis football — St. Louis Rams
It’s been a frustrating season for both UC Davis football and the St. Louis Rams.
Both teams started a first year quarterback last season — Randy Wright for UC Davis and Sam Bradford for the Rams — and both rookie signal-callers progressed as the season went along.
With an extra year of experience at the sport’s most crucial position, UC Davis and St. Louis were both expected to contend in their wide open division (the Big West Conference and the NFC West, respectively).
Neither side has come close to reaching those expectations.
The Aggies are currently 2-6 on the year with an embarrassing loss to Humboldt State marring their resume, while the Rams have started their season with an unimpressive 1-6 record.
UC Davis men’s soccer — San Francisco 49ers
Aggie men’s soccer has provided a remarkable turnaround this season, much in the same way as the one seen by the San Francisco 49ers over the last 12 months.
Both teams have far outperformed expectations, and both are currently holding the second seed in their conference’s playoff bracket.
In addition, the 49ers and the Aggies have each tallied impressive wins over top opposition — with San Francisco defeating the then 5-0 Detroit Lions, and UC Davis beating top-10 nationally ranked UCLA and UC Irvine this season.
Despite their strong seasons so far, however, both the 49ers and the Aggies will need to prove themselves in the postseason before they can convince a wide-spread audience that they are contenders.
UC Davis women’s soccer — Cincinnati Bengals
On the women’s side, UC Davis looks a lot like the Cincinnati Bengals.
Both squads entered the season with low expectations. The Aggies were picked to finish eighth out of nine teams in the Big West Conference preseason poll, while the Bengals were predicted by many to finish last in the AFC North.
Both teams have surprised this year, however, as UC Davis is currently on its way to the Big West Tournament and Cincinnati is contending for a playoff spot.
In addition, while both teams have been sparked by strong offensive performances, the Bengals and Aggies are, at their core, defensive teams.
Cincinnati is ranked second in total defense, while UC Davis has relied on the veteran defensive prowess of seniors center back Aisha Lott and goalkeeper Maria Magana.
UC Davis volleyball — Buffalo Bills
The Aggies surprised many with an incredible start to the 2011 season, just as the Bills shocked the sporting world by coming out of the blocks fast in the NFL season.
While both teams have been up and down on the road over the past few weeks, the UC Davis and Buffalo both boast undefeated home records this season.
And like the Bills traveled across the border to play a home game in Toronto on Sunday, the Aggies have journeyed across campus to play home contests in Hickey Gym at times this year.
UC Davis field hockey — Carolina Panthers
It’s a team lacking in tradition, which has been down over the past few years but is now beginning to grow in power.
The sentence described both the UC Davis field hockey team and the Carolina Panthers.
These two teams present a difficult challenge for any team they face, but neither has been able to finish many close games.
UC Davis played Stanford close in September, and took California to over time just over a week ago, while Carolina came close to beating Green Bay early this year.
While both the Aggies and the Panthers have proven they can provide formidable opposition against quality opponents, both sides need to start winning big games if they plan to garner the respect of fans and experts alike.
TREVOR CRAMER can be reached at sports@theaggie.org.
Every year, chemical engineering students from across the country meet for a competition of accuracy and precision. The competition, which was hosted by the American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE) from Oct. 14 to 16, is a challenge to design a chemically-powered car that will travel a specified distance. The car that stops closest to the finish line is the winner. This year, the cars had to travel 68 feet under their own power while carrying a 350-gram load. Out of 32 teams in the national competition, UC Davis placed second.
The UC Davis team has about 20 students who are broken into four sub-groups: the chassis team, the battery team, the stopping mechanism team and the programming team.
“The car was built completely from scratch,” said Nick Rossow, a junior chemical engineering major and member of the UC Davis team. “It is a little bigger than a shoebox.”
Building the car took about three months, and after it was completed in April, the team kept refining the design until the competition in October.
The team built its own battery from aluminium plates and copper plates, and built the chassis out of Plexiglas and roller skate wheels. The six-cell battery used bleach as an oxidizer and got up to 12 volts. The reaction inside the battery is highly corrosive and renders the battery unusable after a few hours. The copper and aluminium plates have to be cleaned with acid before they can be used again.
In addition to making a chemical reaction to make the car go, the teams also had to make a chemical reaction that would cause the car to stop after a specified time. This reaction is called the stopping mechanism. The difficulty behind the stopping mechanism is figuring out when it is supposed to start.
The teams each know how fast their cars move, so based on how far the cars have to travel, the team can calculate when to make the stopping mechanism kick in.
“This is an accuracy competition,” said Audrey Magnusen, a senior chemical engineering major and captain of the UC Davis team. “We didn’t know until an hour before the competition how far our car had to travel.”
The Davis team’s stopping mechanism is called an Iodine Clock Reaction. This is a mixture of potassium iodide, sodium thiosulfate, hydrogen peroxide and sulfuric acid all combined in a starch solution. When these ingredients mix, the mixture changes from clear to dark blue, signalling the car to stop. The team had to calculate the exact ratios of each chemical that would make the car stop at the right time.
Although the main competition was an accuracy contest for proximity to the finish line, there were also various sub-competitions such as best poster and and the safety award. The team from Texas Tech University won the safety award for designing the safest battery. Its battery was designed to safely contain and disperse all of the heat generated by the chemical reactions in the battery.
“The reaction we chose to power our car creates a large amount of hydrogen and heat. The car’s battery was triply contained inside glass containers and then a polyethylene [an acid-resistant plastic] container,” said Thomas Hoover, captain of the Texas Tech team.
“Without safety, nothing can be accomplished,” he said.
Every car at this competition was unique. Each team had a different chassis, different design and different chemical ratios. Even though many teams used the same chemical reactions to stop and start their cars, they were all implemented differently.
The competition provided a perfect medium to learn not just about chemical engineering, but about cooperation, teamwork and working under strict time constraints.
“We learned that there are a ton of ways to achieve the same goal,” Rossow said. “There is more than one right way to do something.”
The competition was sponsored by Chevron and ConocoPhillips.
HUDSON LOFCHIE can be reached at science@theaggie.org.
Do you know anyone who doesn’t have a cell phone? Chances are that, if you’re in lecture while you’re reading this, most students are either on their cell phones or have them out on their desks. Despite some professors’ rules to keep cell phones turned off and in backpacks, students still use them. UC Davis students are not alone; statistics from June 2011 show that nearly everyone in the United States has a cell phone.
Such wide use of cell phones is why it was hard to escape the headline “WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION SAYS CELL PHONES CAUSE CANCER!!!” last May and June. I saw the story posted on Twitter, Reddit and Facebook multiple times. CNN, BBC and countless other networks all featured the story on their sites and in their broadcasts. Their headlines sounded slightly less hysterical but stated the same thing.
Now, a second question: do you know anyone who got rid of their cell phone as a result? Either no one cares whether they get brain cancer, or everyone knew the story was a ridiculous exaggeration.
It looks like it was the latter. Most media reports left out the details of what exactly this declaration meant. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a part of the World Health Organization (WHO), classified cell phones as part of Group 2B, which is “possibly carcinogenic to humans.”
According to the IARC information sheet, Group 2B “is used for agents for which there is limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and less than sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals. It may also be used when there is inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity in humans but sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals.”
This flood of jargon basically means that if a couple of studies found even a tiny risk of cancer for people or animals exposed to a certain substance or device, they are classified into Group 2B. This group includes asphalt and diesel fuel.
The most recent of a large number of health studies on cell phones has been a Danish study that looked at 420,000 cell phone subscribers and found no correlation with cell phone subscription and incidence of brain cancers, even for those who had been subscribers for over 10 years.
The problem with the media focusing on only one science story at a time is that it gives the impression that this one study is all that separates doctors from thinking that cell phones actually cause cancer. It also makes people think that any weakness in this one study means that there may actually be a cancer risk.
The Danish study does have weaknesses, the way every study does. The Danish study is a cohort study, which means researchers follow a group of people over time and study the incidence of cancer between different populations (in this case, one population has cell phones and the other does not).
Fortunately, scientists do not rely upon a single study. In order to consider findings valid, there has to be multiple studies from many independent researchers looking at large groups of people. A single study doesn’t tell researchers much; until the findings are replicated and expanded, researchers consider the question open.
The question of the health effects of cell phones has actually been researched a lot in the past couple of decades. The majority of large studies have found no risk at all because the electromagnetic radiation has too low of a frequency to damage DNA, which is what is required to increase rates of cancer. Sometimes, one study will find a slightly increased risk of brain cancer in a certain population, such as children who began using cell phones before the age of 20. Later studies then disprove that link.
Why the inconsistency? It’s called statistical error: sometimes, by chance, researchers collect data that is different from the actual value. Using a larger sample decreases the possibility of this kind of error, but it can still happen. That’s why researchers will often repeat studies that they or their colleagues already did, so that they can decrease the possibility of error as much as possible.
So far, the research says that you have nothing to fear from your cell phone. Just make sure that if you’re in class, turn it off or keep it on silent; the real risk is that if it vibrates during class, the professor may snap out of frustration.
AMY STEWART can be reached at science@theaggie.org, or you can call her on her cell phone.
As a result of complaints, injuries and decreased overall campus safety, Transportation and Parking Services (TAPS), the UC Davis Police Department and the superior court in Woodland, have decided to start the Bicycle Education and Enforcement Program at UC Davis.
Officially launched on Oct. 10, the program strives to increase education, enforcement and infrastructure. Citations were first issued Oct. 17.
“There is an education and enforcement emphasis. The Bike Education and Enforcement Program was developed to help the students and the police,” said UC Davis Police Chief Annette Spicuzza.
In an effort to decrease the monetary burden of tickets for students, which can cost $200 to $225, and to allow the police to properly enforce bike laws, TAPS and the UC Davis Police Department have created an agreement with the Yolo County Superior court.
If a bicyclist receives a citation, they will be expected to watch a 22-minute video, complete an estimated 20-minute, 50 question quiz and pay $70. After, the student will be dismissed, with their citation waived.
“We anticipate success. All of the money will stay on campus to support the program, rather than going to the court,” said Director of TAPS Cliff Contreras .
Previously, the police department felt guilty about giving a college student an expensive bicycling citation. The new program will allow the laws to be properly enforced, without burdening the students.
“As a bike officer, and seeing violations occur, it is a safety issue. I have seen head-on collisions, concussions, front teeth knocked out, cuts on heads and faces, broken ankles and dislocated shoulders. Being able to enforce the laws and not feel bad about fines means more enforcement and education,” said UC Davis police officer, Ralph Nuno.
The most common bicycling violations are not stopping at stop signs, failing to yield to pedestrians and riding with two ear buds in. These result in decreased safety on the UC Davis campus. Bike accidents and injuries are the direct consequence of violating bike laws, according to Nuno.
Nuno, the single bike patrol officer on campus, issued 400 warnings during the first six months of 2011. These were the result of any violations, with the exception of biking under the influence, texting and riding with no hands on the handlebars.
“Through the education program, bicyclists will pay more attention to rules. As human beings, when we see someone being more courteous, we will follow suit,” Nuno said.
Though a mere two weeks old, the BEEProgram has already been put to the test.
“As of last week, three tickets were issued. Two of them immediately went online, passed the test and were all done. They have a full two weeks to take the test, pay $70 and have the citation waived,” Spicuzza said.
The Yolo Country Superior court was so supportive of the BEEProgram proposal that they wanted to implement the program county wide, according to Contreras.
However, it was decided that it would be more effective and courteous to slowly launch this new program, and test it on campus, before branching out.
Currently, 47 percent of the UC Davis student population has chosen to bike as their primary mode of transportation. With so many bicyclists, it is necessary to maintain a bicycling safety.
“The BEEProgram will create a safer environment to ride bikes in a safer way. We hope to encourage and incentivize people to bike instead of drive,” Contreras said.
Bicyclists are encouraged to follow the speed limit, use hand signals and be visible at night, while also abiding by laws of bicycling.
Directors of the BEEProgram are looking to a reduced carbon footprint, lowered emission level and a decreased cost of parking for students. The hope is that the undergraduates, and the 5,000 incoming first-year students will learn to be safer on bikes.
DANIELLE HUDDLESTUN can be reached at campus@theaggie.org.
Attention students: ASUCD wants to pay for your books and tuition; maybe some new clothes, too.
With the weak economy and tuition hikes on the horizon, students are struggling to make ends meet. In an effort to help students financially, ASUCD Vice President Bree Rombi, along with ASUCD Senator Andre Lee, uncovered a scholarship fund that has not been given out in years.
“If you go outside and ask someone what their issue is, it’s always about money. Tuition is going up,” Rombi said.
In order to encourage more people to apply, ASUCD engineered a holistic approach to the screening process, noted Annemarie Stone, chair of the ASUCD Academic Affairs Commission.
Applicants will be judged based on a variety of factors, including academic achievement, extracurricular activities, leadership potential and financial need. The online application is available at asucd.ucdavis.edu/scholarship and will be due today at 11:59 p.m. Four $500 awards and three $1,000 awards will be given out.
The scholarship will be disbursed to the recipient’s student account to cover any outstanding charges. But in the event that there are no charges, the money will be deposited into the student’s bank account, where ASUCD will have no control over how the funds are spent.
Although Rombi concedes there is no way for ASUCD to regulate how recipients spend their scholarship dollars, she is nevertheless hopeful that this will make a significant difference in someone’s life.
“$1,000 is a lot of money,” Rombi said.
One of the conditions for receiving the scholarship is that it must be reported to the UC Davis Financial Aid Office. Despite negotiations with the department, ASUCD was unable to reach any agreement to mitigate the scholarship’s potential impact on existing university financial aid.
According to Lee, in some cases, the scholarship may adversely affect a student’s aid from the university. Lee hopes that students who do not qualify for university aid, but who still need financial help, will apply. However, all eligible undergraduates are encouraged to apply.
“There’s not a lot ASUCD can do to address students’ concerns about tuition, but this is one tangible way we can help,” Lee said.
RICHARD CHANG can be reached at campus@theaggie.org.
The weather is changing, and that means the weekends at the pool are over. Picnics are hard to manage in wintry weather, and romantic strolls around the Arboretum are never as fun in the rain.
Just because the sun has gone into hiding doesn’t mean there is no more fun to be had.
Thanks to the convenient location of Davis, there are a number of winter activities nearby, some of which students can easily come across right here on campus.
The Ski or Snowboard Club (SOS) is responsible for heading up a number of trips during the fall and winter months. SOS publicity officer Brian Yang said paying the $30 membership is nothing compared to the perks members earn.
“During winter quarter we have cabin trips to Lake Tahoe every other week starting from Martin Luther King, Jr. weekend. The prices vary from $45 to $65 for members depending on if it’s a long weekend. Non-members pay up to $85 for the same trips. So going on just two trips would pay for membership itself,” Yang said.
Included in the $30 membership fee is a shirt, access to events, discounts on trips and discounts on corporate companies and business gear and services.
According to Yang, there is also one event in particular this year that is one to not be missed.
“Our biggest event is the All-Cal Ski & Snowboard Fest. It’s a UC takeover of a world-class resort we have every year. Our destination this year is the renowned Steamboat Resort in Colorado. All the UC schools take part in this trip during the first part of winter break, from Dec. 10 to 17,” Yang said.
Going on this sort of trip individually would cost students well over $1,000. However, Yang said the large number of UC students in attendance at the event allows participants a hefty discount.
“The cost is just $649 which includes transportation, lodging, lift tickets and a bunch of events,” Yang said.
Maybe students would love to go play in the snow, but skiing and snowboarding just isn’t their thing.
With a short drive up to Boreal ski resort in Lake Tahoe, students and their friends can hop on some inner-tubes and enjoy the slopes, as well.
Playland at Boreal, located off the Boreal/Castle Peak exit on Interstate 80, offers a moving carpet and groomed tubing lanes and tubes.
The tubing season officially opens Thanksgiving weekend, and for a two-hour tubing session students can expect to pay $25.
Boreal also offers a college season pass for $129, which allows college students to hit the slopes anytime Monday through Friday.
Perhaps snow just isn’t your thing at all. Maybe you’d rather take a look at a rather large corn maze instead.
Located just nine miles from Davis, Cool Patch Pumpkins in Dixon is home to the world’s largest corn maze, and is currently in the middle of its season.
The maze, located on Milk Farm Road off Interstate 80, will be open through Sunday this year from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. daily. Tickets are $10.
Due to the large size of the corn maze, owners advise that it’s wise to give yourself a lot of time to find your way from beginning to end. Wear old shoes since there are still small muddy spots from row irrigation.
Mark Cooley, owner of Cool Patch Pumpkins, said he isn’t the only one who believes their maze is one in a million.
“I’m always being told that our maze is the maze that you have to visit,” Cooley said. “We have a lot of other fun things, too, though. The pumpkins, of course, and even a scarecrow contest.”
For the small town shopper, Apple Hill is located in at 2345 Carson Road in Placerville, an hour outside of Davis. Fall and winter are apple season, and the farmers are officially open for business.
There are many local growers located at Apple Hill, many offering organic apples, homemade apple cider, arts and crafts and even apple wine.
Able’s Apple Acres, which is located at the top of the hill, is open until Christmas Eve this year and its hours vary by the time of year.
From opening day, which was Sept. 3, until Sunday, the farm will operate from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. From Monday to Dec. 23 it will be open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.
In addition to homemade baked goods and backyard-style barbecue, Able’s Apple Acres also offers pony rides and hay mazes every weekend.
Evelyn Able, owner of Able’s Apple Acres, is proud to boast the strong family ties involved with her ranch.
“We have four generations that all come together to work at the ranch during the season. It brings a great sense of family,” Able said.
MICHELLE STAUFFER can be reached at features@theaggie.org.
Davis City Councilmember Stephen Souza plans to officially announce his candidacy for the June 2012 council election Saturday morning. The announcement will be made at 10 a.m. at the Davis Bicycle Hall of Fame at Third and B Streets in downtown.
Following the speech, Souza will conduct a “Rolling Announcement,” in which he will bike throughout Davis, stopping at places in town that represent “Promises Made and Promises Kept” in Souza’s past seven years on city council. He encourages and invites everyone to come on the bike ride with him. Stops along the route will also highlight his vision of accomplishments he still wants to fulfill.
– Angela Swartz
Teams: UC Davis vs. Cal State Fullerton; vs. UC Riverside
Records: Aggies 7-7-2 (5-3-0); Titans 7-6-4(1-5-2); Highlanders 9-5-3(4-3-2)
Where: Aggie Soccer Field; UCR Soccer Stadium — Riverside, Calif.
When: Wednesday at 3 p.m.; Saturday at 6 p.m.
Who to watch: Mustafa Chopan has logged the third highest amount of playing time of all position players on the UC Davis team. He has managed three shots and an assist over the course of the season.
Yet, defensive prowess is what Chopan can be better associated. The junior from Citrus Heights, Calif. is a strong component in the Aggies’ wall-like defense and can be found patrolling the backfield for the majority of every game.
Did you know? Head Coach Dwayne Shaffer has pointed out that every soccer stadium is different, from the dimensions to the distractions.
The Aggies have had a slight home field advantage, as 10 of UC Davis’s 18 regular season games (including today’s against Cal State Fullerton) have been at Aggie Soccer Field.
UC Davis will face a unique challenge on Saturday, however, as UC Riverside Soccer Stadium is the only stadium in Big West Conference with an artificial-turf field.
Preview: Often hailed as one of the toughest college soccer conferences in the nation, the Big West is in a tight race. The top four teams go to the Big West tournament, a playoff whose reward is a berth in the NCAA tournament and a chance to battle for a national title.
UC Davis finds itself as one of the front-runners, holding a second place standing behind UC Irvine. The Aggies can lock up a conference postseason appearance with a victory in either one of the games this week.
“We don’t concern ourselves with standings. We aren’t focused on anything other than playing well and staying healthy,” Shaffer said.
When asked whether he expected his team to be in this position at this point of the season, Shaffer replied “Absolutely.”
“They have a tremendous amount of experience now and we’re as good as anyone we play,” he said. “Nobody has proven to be way better than us at all and we’re still improving every day.”
UC Davis is coming off its second loss of the season to a strong UC Santa Barbara team that finds itself in fourth place in the Big West, despite being nationally ranked.
In a season where UC Davis has had victories snatched from them by chance and bad luck, the Aggies finally control their own fate. These final two games can put UC Davis in the Big West tournament, as well as determine a home field advantage for the competition.
Still, a postseason appearance is far from a guarantee at this point, and the Aggies are going to come out full steam ahead until the season is done.
“[CSU Fullerton] is a very good team and we haven’t played them yet,” Shaffer said. “But they have to come to our home field so it’s looking good for us. We will be ready.”
— Matthew Yuen
When I was 16, I wanted to be 18. Then when I turned 18, I couldn’t wait to be 21. After that, there’s not another age which anyone looks forward to. Every age gained after 21 will just be another passing of a year.
Besides, becoming an adult is frightening. There are so many uncertainties that lurk beyond the threshold of youth, and venturing out into the adult world — where we must take an active part in our lives — is foreign.
For the first couple decades of our existence, everything is pretty much mapped out for us by our parents. Each day is the same quotidian routine of waking up, going to school, extracurriculars, homework, sleep and repeat. The next day is predictable and, likewise, the next decade is foreseeable.
And though this humdrum, and perhaps mechanical, way of life seems boring now, it won’t be in the near future. Once we graduate, we’ll find ourselves yearning for those lazy school days when we can just shuffle from class to class and be greeted with the old familiar faces of friends and teachers.
Waking up to a midterm is better than waking up to find that we must fend for ourselves, nudging and elbowing our way through life to get to the top. And when bad things happen, we can’t turn to our parents to make it better.
Long gone will be the days when we get sick and all we had to do was sit in the car while Mom drove us to the doctor. All of a sudden, we’ll find ourselves comparing health insurance plans and making our own calls to the hospital.
Furthermore, when we want to buy something, we won’t casually pull out our allowance to get it. As adults, before we buy anything, we will ask ourselves first whether the item was ethically produced, what percentage of profits will go to the corporation or to the field workers, what the cost will do to our monthly expenses and how the item will incorporate into our taxes.
Responsibilities will number by the dozen each day. If you are one of those people who can barely wake up for your classes or cook for yourself now, the thought of one day buying a house and feeding your family is too intimidating to entertain.
It’s no wonder, then, that the percentage of students attending graduate school is increasing despite the augmentation in tuition. Being a student is choosing a safe and worry-free life. The school environment is familiar and comforting. It’s easier to learn about world problems in class and write equations to mitigate high inflation rather than face it ourselves.
That’s why the thought of one day becoming an adult is so nerve-racking. We’re not prepared. For the last 20 or so years, all we have known is how to be students. We know how to take notes, memorize and raise our hands. But do we know how to apply for a mortgage loan? Can we pay for our bills and do our taxes properly?
Unfortunately, there’s no book or class called How to be a Grownup 101. With our student mentality, we are expecting adulthood to be similar to an exam, but I’ve been told there’s no better way to prepare for being an adult than to actually be one.
The truth is we most likely won’t even know when we’ve become full-time adults. There’s no appointed date and time when we shed our immature ways and suddenly turn into all-knowing beings. There’s no ceremony or rite of passage for entering into adulthood – no orientation, no tutorial.
There’s really no transition period. It just happens out of the blue. The sad part is, in the midst of getting used to being adults, we won’t even realize that our summers are gone forever.
Unless we become school teachers, we will no longer get three months off at the end of the school year to lounge around and do absolutely nothing.
As adults, every season will blend together into a long, continuous ribbon of work and family. And while it will technically look like summer outside your office window, the season will essentially be meaningless.
Want to be a kid forever? Tell MICHELLE NGUYEN at michellen1990@yahoo.com and she will make it happen.
“My intention is to review the input you provide, and then set a course for achieving excellence in our program and our student-athletes.”
With that statement Chancellor Katehi recently declared her intent to decide the future of Aggie Athletics. She’s hiring a new Athletic Director, so she’s decided that the very nature of the program is up for grabs. Her grabs. Oh, and that she considers neither Aggie Athletics nor Aggie student-athletes “excellent” now.
It turns out there are very good reasons why Aggie Athletics is the way it is and why Aggie student-athletes are nothing short of amazing. There’s even a name for it: The Davis Way. It’s the real source of Aggie Pride. It’s what makes UC Davis unique and why it won six Director’s Cups at the D2 level. It’s about doing college sports in a principled, values-based way that is almost unheard of in D1. It’s based on an “educational model” and remembering that athletes are students first. It’s what the Ivy League does. It’s what Stanford does (albeit with a much larger budget). But almost no other schools you have ever heard of. Everybody else is going for the gold. Everybody else plays the lottery. College sports are a terrific thing, but like even a good drug, it can be abused. And abuse is rampant in big time sports where money and egos hold sway over values and principles.
In 2010 the chancellor argued that fiscal sustainability required that four important sports be dropped –– and she got away with it. Where is her fiscal sustainability argument this year? What’s sustainable about needing to double or triple spending on Athletics? How much will it cost to add at least 30K seats to Aggie stadium? When the NCAA caves to pressure to pay big time college athletes actual salaries in addition to scholarships, what will UC Davis do then? We’ll have to “remain competitive,” won’t we? If any of this were ever about fiscal sustainability it would be ludicrous to even consider going “big time”. All but a few D1 schools bleed money through their athletic departments. Thus, her very proposition amounts to an admission that this has nothing to do with fiscal sustainability. It’s about money (yours) and it’s about ego (hers).
Whose program is ICA anyway? Who’s paying for it? According to the recently completed UC Davis Athletics Strategic Audit, the students are directly responsible for $19M of the $22M annual ICA budget. And of that $19M, $16M is based on voluntarily self-taxation (SASI, CEI, FACE initiatives). The annual cash flow provided by ASUCD is equivalent to a nearly $400M endowment. ASUCD is the largest donor UC Davis Athletics will ever know. In your four years at UCD, you’ll contribute over $2,400 to ICA. Do you want that investment to continue to enrich your university and enhance its reputation as a principled leader, as did your predecessors? Or are you OK with your family going further into debt to subsidize the farm systems of the NFL and NBA?
Webster’s defines “piracy” as “the unauthorized use of another’s production, invention or conception.” What the university community has been experiencing for nearly two years now is nothing short of piracy. Allow this administration an opportunity to reconstitute ICA and the program we know and cherish will cease to exist. The pressure put on football and basketball to win and be profitable will be unrealistic and unfair. It will put good people in bad situations. Expectations of additional fundraising will be irrational, and when those efforts come up short, many more sports will be cut. It will end up looking like our failure, not hers.
Don’t be fooled by those who say this is just about choosing an AD. Don’t accept that this has anything to do with achieving true excellence. And it’s not about going back to D2, either. It’s about doing D1 right. The Davis Way.
Get informed. Get involved. Know where your money goes and accept nothing less than full transparency and accountability. It’s your program, it’s your house and it’s your turn to defend it.
©2021, ASUCD. Designed by Creative Media.
