Info on Hyland Ski in Bloomington, MN?

I am taking a telemark class which has been very fun abd instructive.
There appears to be some unofficial trail(s) linking the ski slope to
the cross country ski trails nearby.

Anybody in the group familiar with this area. I just love skiiing or
hoofing it up a hill to ski down.

Later,
Ed V.

On Jan 17, 7:24*am, EdV wrote:
I am taking a telemark class which has been very fun abd instructive.
There appears to be some unofficial trail(s) linking the ski slope to
the cross country ski trails nearby.

Anybody in the group familiar with this area. *I just love skiiing or
hoofing it up a hill to ski down.

Later,
* * * * Ed V.

Here's the cross country ski link -
http://www.threeriversparkdistrict.o...rk_reserve.cfm

There are some rumors about a man-made snow loop for cross country
skiing near the downhill area next year...

Manmade loop at Hyland? That would be nice! I've always had a little
beef with Three Rivers Park and their Elm Creek expansion in recent
years. I'll preface it by saying they probably had good reason, but I
don't know exactly what. Maybe someone can tell me

Hyland is the pretty much the most central park in their system
(compared to the entire metro), so you'd think it would get the most
attention. Hyland downhill already has grooming equipment (multiple
Pisten Bulleys, snowmobiles, etc.) and tons of snow guns. You'd think
Three Rivers would have made their first manmade XC loop right at
Hyland. Much of the equipment was already on site. Sure the downhill
side would get priority, but it still seems logical to share equipment
whenever possible.

Or am I just mad because I live 10 minutes from Hyland, and 45 minutes
from Elm Creek?

More mad, I'm guessing. Hyland would have required some reconstruction
topographically and structurally to come up with a 2-4k contained (sole
use) x-c ski loop, and those piston bullies, etc., would have to be
transported back and forth around the park. And that's just for x-c
skiing. Elm Creek offered the possibility of creating from the ground up
a compact multi-use winter facility in the growing northwest suburbs,
something that was lacking. Maybe there were also funding source issues
involved with a new facility as opposed to an existing one. I think EC
was seen as an experiment. It's working out well has created the basis
for looking at another on the south side. They could have gone with
Wirth (Mpls city), but probably for location and control issues
preferred one of their own. I'm guessing they'd even prefer something
with Elm Creek like possibilities, but the location or money for it
isn't there.

RM


" wrote:

Manmade loop at Hyland? That would be nice! I've always had a little
beef with Three Rivers Park and their Elm Creek expansion in recent
years. I'll preface it by saying they probably had good reason, but I
don't know exactly what. Maybe someone can tell me

Hyland is the pretty much the most central park in their system
(compared to the entire metro), so you'd think it would get the most
attention. Hyland downhill already has grooming equipment (multiple
Pisten Bulleys, snowmobiles, etc.) and tons of snow guns. You'd think
Three Rivers would have made their first manmade XC loop right at
Hyland. Much of the equipment was already on site. Sure the downhill
side would get priority, but it still seems logical to share equipment
whenever possible.

Or am I just mad because I live 10 minutes from Hyland, and 45 minutes
from Elm Creek?

On Feb 2, 10:21 am, wrote:
More mad, I'm guessing. Hyland would have required some reconstruction
topographically and structurally to come up with a 2-4k contained (sole
use) x-c ski loop, and those piston bullies, etc., would have to be
transported back and forth around the park. And that's just for x-c
skiing. Elm Creek offered the possibility of creating from the ground up
a compact multi-use winter facility in the growing northwest suburbs,
something that was lacking. Maybe there were also funding source issues
involved with a new facility as opposed to an existing one. I think EC
was seen as an experiment. It's working out well has created the basis
for looking at another on the south side. They could have gone with
Wirth (Mpls city), but probably for location and control issues
preferred one of their own. I'm guessing they'd even prefer something
with Elm Creek like possibilities, but the location or money for it
isn't there.

RM

" wrote:
Manmade loop at Hyland? That would be nice! I've always had a little
beef with Three Rivers Park and their Elm Creek expansion in recent
years. I'll preface it by saying they probably had good reason, but I
don't know exactly what. Maybe someone can tell me

Hyland is the pretty much the most central park in their system
(compared to the entire metro), so you'd think it would get the most
attention. Hyland downhill already has grooming equipment (multiple
Pisten Bulleys, snowmobiles, etc.) and tons of snow guns. You'd think
Three Rivers would have made their first manmade XC loop right at
Hyland. Much of the equipment was already on site. Sure the downhill
side would get priority, but it still seems logical to share equipment
whenever possible.

Or am I just mad because I live 10 minutes from Hyland, and 45 minutes
from Elm Creek?
I think there's a reasonable beef there - I'm equadistance from both
facilaties and have aways been confused why the lunar EC was picked.
But still very thankful it is there.

From what I understand the MM loop at hyland is going to be on the
south side of the downhill area. An out and back of around 2K - so a
total of 4-5K.