MAKING SNOW
reduced season-pass rate. “It has definite- ly been worth it financially,” says Enman.
RIKERT OUTDOOR CENTER, VT
Racing into the future. Racing was also a consideration at the Rikert cross-coun- try center in nearby Ripton, Vt. Rikert is owned by Middlebury College, with an endowment of roughly $1.5 billion, so when Mike Hussey—who had led Rikert for 14 years before moving on to run the burgeoning Oak Hill Outdoor Center in Hanover, N.H., this spring—decided to go the snowmaking route in 2013, there was capital to draw on. Nevertheless, when Hussey mapped out a 5-kilometer track to be covered with machine-made snow, and to be widened and graded in order to meet homologa- tion standards for FIS racing, he had to justify the initial outlay of $850,000 to the college higher-ups. Hosting races and providing a race-training venue for the college’s highly ranked ski team was a big part of the reasoning. More import- ant, perhaps, was simply being able to stay open throughout the winter for ski- ing and, hence, being able to generate a more continuous revenue stream. Positive impact. The impact, says Hussey, was immediate. The number of days open for skiing jumped from 70 to 140, resulting in a substantial increase in skier days and revenues. Hussey says that the initial investment “is about paid back at this point.” If there is one thing Hussey might have done differently, it would have been to reduce the size the snowmaking area, commensurately reducing the expense. The 5k distance was based on typical race lengths, but Hussey says that he noticed that at other race venues this past winter there were no loops longer than 3.3k. Water rationing. For Rikert, the biggest hurdle to clear was water sup- ply. Rikert has a limited amount of available water and, prior to the snow- making installation, had to go through Vermont’s rigid Act 250 process that reg- ulates environmental issues for devel- opers. As a result, Rikert’s snowmaking process must be limited to one segment of a half kilometer or so at a time (or around 24 hours of snowmaking), then it must allow the water reservoir to
Lorem ipsum confugere in pereptua mermani fermenti logamerno.
Sleepy Hollow, Vt., has continually added to its snowmaking system over the years. Its custom “mini guns” (pictured) and HKD mobile sticks cover about 3 kilometers of trails.
facility with a public-interest mandate. Still, the proposition was expensive, and any investment involving taxpayer money is always subject to public scru- tiny. However, for at least some of the financing, Spirit Mountain could look to the active Duluth Cross Country Ski Club. In a fundraising campaign, the club was able to raise $900,000, some of which went to subsidizing the cost of the snowmaking system. (Lighted trails for night skiing were also part of the plan.) Herewith a lesson for all cross-coun- try areas: local ski club members or season passholders can potentially be a significant source of energy, organiza- tion, and fundraising clout for any area looking to make improvements, snow- making or otherwise. SLEEPY HOLLOW, VT An economical and incremental approach. Eli Enman, proprietor of Sleepy Hollow cross-country center in Huntington, Vt., decided to enter the world of snowmaking in 2012 with an economical and incremental approach. He had first considered installing snow- making in 2000, but after consulting with snowmaking experts, he was turned away by what he calls “sticker shock.” By 2012, though, Enman revisited the snowmaking idea. “We needed more consistency,” he says, in being able to cover a full winter without repeated clo- sures due to lack of snow. So, that fall, Sleepy Hollow installed a “tiny system” with about 300 feet of 6-inch water and
air pipe and a few hundred feet of 2-inch pipe that fed two HKD air-water guns from two 7.5-horsepower water pumps, and one 15-horsepower air compressor. Including a few hundred feet of snow- making hose, the initial cost was rough- ly $70,000. Sleepy Hollow was already using heavy machinery for grooming, so there was no additional expense involved there. Enman has consistently added to the system over the years, supplement- ing the HKD guns with 16 “mini guns” designed by a Sleepy Hollow passhold- er. These guns have camlock fittings so they can be moved around and attached to fixed mounts along the air and water line. “We can run 16 mini guns from bur- ied HDPE pipe with the ‘hydrant’ sets teed-in every 40 feet,” says Enman. Now, three 7.5-horsepower water pumps deliv- er 90 gpm from two water storage ponds. The Sleepy Hollow system can cover 1,000 to 1,200 feet at a time in 24 hours. Total coverage is about 3 kilometers. Including the initial installation in 2012, Enman says the total investment has been roughly $200,000 to $250,000. He estimates that his annual electrical costs run about $5,000. Measuring the ROI. The overall impact of the investment? A big pulse of energy into Sleepy Hollow’s revenue stream, says Enman. Skier visits went “way up,” supplemented by the area’s ability to host more events and provide a race-training facility for hundreds of nearby high-school kids paying a
Made with FlippingBook Digital Proposal Creator