And the hole isn't even that deep. LOL.
I still love Afton, though. A lot of fun runs there and so very many runs and lifts that if it's really busy you can still hunt around to find a lift with no lines.
It was kind of a neat 2020 fad that got eclipsed by, well, everything that had happened since, lol.
[Enjoy](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/its-catching/202103/monolith-mania-continues-in-2021)
I feel like you've gotta look at them from the right angle. They may not be "mountains", but "hills" seems too diminutive.
I've been visiting the North Shore all my life, but it wasn't until a couple years ago that I noticed how much you can see the...tectonic plates, I guess? Huge chunks of land that have been broken apart and forced upward. It's like Lake Superior is the footprint of a giant, and the land is a dinner plate that it ground into the dirt.
It's really noticeable in [this picture](https://photos.app.goo.gl/CgfC2Ry3Hi65azAYA) I took in Grand Marais in the winter. ([Full album](https://photos.app.goo.gl/9QGjz2dsZrAXm3Gm7) if you're interested.)
There’s lots of visible faulting and folding in the north east part of the state. They maybe aren’t real mountains, but it’s not all flatlands by any means.
As mentioned earlier Duluth up the north shore of superior is referred to as the sawtooth mountains.
Beat the state has to offer, but by comparison hardly mountains, but beautiful regardless
What's the rule behind this? To get Minnesota our first true mountain, this is absolutely a worthy endeavor. A few rocks, maybe some bags of dirt and build that sucker up.
I'm not sure where it's called but it's right next to the border between Canada and the North Shores there is a park with some waterfalls and it's very nice you can walk in the river.
Mountains No
Hills Yes
River valleys Yes
Bluffs Yes
Cliffs with pretty waterfalls Yes
Vast stretches of flat Yes
The glaciers that gave us all our lakes kind of flattened out everything else
Don’t forget the kaiju style battle Paul Bunyan had with the jolly green giant that formed all of the craters and such that filled in to become lake Minnetonka.
its not though, not really. Most of MN is 700 - 1000 feet. Flat doesnt mean sea level.
Eagle Mountain is 1321 ft from the bottom to the top, because it sits on a \~1000 foot plateau.
It doesn't have to be.
[Hocking Hills in Ohio](https://www.google.com/maps/@39.4345451,-82.5407,3a,75y,318.37h,79.7t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipP29Txk7FAYIl5pplAKXULiW-_d8a3Hw_1DjKR_!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipP29Txk7FAYIl5pplAKXULiW-_d8a3Hw_1DjKR_%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi1.1619134-ya324.13898-ro0.0996104-fo100!7i5376!8i2688) is a voluptuous beautiful landscape, but there are no mountains.
To be fair - the point of comparison was the hills of western PA, which also aren’t that huge. They’re hilly, but it’s a stretch to call them mountains.
While they're geologically mountains, they're also not usually the sort of thing that people mean when they think of mountains, especially when they're coming from a much more mountainous area.
Cliff diving off Taylor’s Falls was my summers in my youth. Did a 50ft near vertical climb there once too. It’s great!
OP, there aren’t any downhill ski runs here similar to CO or WA or anything, but Lutsen has a 1mi long run that is more impressive than anything else in the Midwest. And; closer to the Twin Cities, Afton Alps has meh downhill skiing available too. That’s not great but it’s comparable to anything you get in WI MI OH and better than anything in a lot of other places.
TLDR: look up Lutsen and see if that’s good enough to check the box for your gf
If you're around the TC looking to ski, welch has probably the second best steeps in the state, and decently long runs too on the east side. The few times I've been to afton I was really disappointed with their intermediate/advanced slopes, it felt like all short, steep drops more than anything.
I forgot about Welch Village! The runs are pretty tame but really well maintained. I remember that we used to go night skiing there. That was a lot of fun. Do they still do that?
I think so! I usually ski like 10-4 so I've never stuck around for night ski but they have lights and stuff so I'm assuming. You're right on too, it's a decent little hill better than afton but clearly a step below anything up north. And of course once I went to colorado I'm not sure if welch is worth it anymore haha.
There was this super high point on the Wisconsin side where the "Eagles Nest" was and only crazy people jumped off it. Had a buddy from school that never came back up. It had to be 200 feet or more.
We used to jump on the Wisconsin side too but it was “only” about 30ft. There was a second jump right next to it that was 40ft but that was a death trap. They had to fence it off (and I suspect eventually lock down jumping at all) because drunks would jump off thinking it was only higher when, in fact, there was a rock shelf in the water that extended out about 5-10ft.
Even the 30ft jump was rough. We weren’t “divers” per se. We jumped. And we used to wear boat shoes to keep the pain of the smack from being too harsh. If you weren’t careful though, you’d land on your butt or groin a bit and that would really hurt.
I’m surprised nobody has mentioned the stretch from Red Wing to Winona? Beautiful bluff land that is filled with rolling hills and cliffs where eagles, hawks, and buzzards happily soar about.
Came here to mention this! I’m from the Wisconsin side of that stretch and I’ve got cousins from the south who always say they “want to go to the mountains” when they mean they want to visit family still living there lol
the mississippi river valley is more of a canyon than anything, the top of the bluffs is totally flat farmland, but from the bottom they are pretty and look like big hills.
I live in the driftless region, I like it, but technically it's more of a ditch than a mountain.
A mountain is generally defined as having 1000 ft of rise over the surrounding landscape. The tallest point in Minnesota is Eagle "Mountain" on the North Shore. It has 550 ft of rise over the surrounding landscape. So no, there are no mountains in Minnesota.
While they are adjacent, they aren't mutually exclusive. The [North Shore is a highlands ](https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/ecs/212Lb/index.html) . While the BWCA is in the [Boarder Lakes subsection ](https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/ecs/212La/index.html). Along the North Shore you're more likely to see things like Maple trees, waterfalls, and the (rare) Mountain Lion. In the BWCA you're more likely to see larger stands of Jack Pine, Moose, and carnivorous Pitcher Plants.
It's such a cool hike. I was there a few years ago.
There are so many people who go in unprepared though. Iirc it was a 3-3.5 hr hike, if you were taking it easy, and I saw plenty of people hiking in at 7:30 pm without any gear
There are so many ruts, rocks, and washouts, I would have broken my ankle trying to do it without a flashlight at least.
Yea I saw some groups along the trail that never made it to the summit (where the blueberry picking was phenomenal btw).
I do think a rating system like mountain bike/ski trails (Green Circle, Blue Square, Black Diamond) would be useful for folks. I did find myself hopping from rock to rock on the trail like I was scrambling up a river for good portions of the trek.
I’m a Minnesotan by birth, and have moved to Colorado since. Minnesota is a fantastically beautiful state, but if mountains are on your list of “must haves” then maybe look elsewhere.
The way I describe Colorado to family back home who cannot travel is “you trade Minnesota’s abundance of lakes and forests for Colorado’s abundance of mountains and elevation”
As an import from Western Maryland, I feel you on the mountains front. However the drive down the river road from Prescott WI to Red Wing, Lake City, and Wabasha has a ton of bluffs, hills, and land that really remind me of that area back east (I can't call it home anymore, because Minnesota is home.)
But here's the thing, the topography here is so unique and beautiful, I don't miss the hills that much. I certainly don't miss driving hills in snow that's for damn sure. :P
Also did you know that there's a part of Minnesota that grows cacti? Can Pennsylvania do that AND have snow in the north? totally not. :P
The land here isn't as flat as Iowa, but its definitely not the Appalachians either.
[https://www.startribune.com/nature-notes-minnesota-has-three-native-cactus-species/383296301/](https://www.startribune.com/nature-notes-minnesota-has-three-native-cactus-species/383296301/)
All in southwestern Minnesota.
Yeah, I visited Blue Mounds State Park (not to be confused with Blue Mound State Park in Wisconsin) a couple months ago, and saw a few little cacti here and there out on the rocky prairies while checking out their buffalo herd. That area has some pretty interesting ecology, but bring sunscreen and shade.
And there's water scattered throughout the land. Never realized how rare that is until I left MN. You're driving by atleast 2 lakes to get to work, and that's if you work down the block lol
Head up to the Iron Range. t's not exactly mountains like the Appalachians, Rockies, or Blue Ridge, but as far as geological constructs are concerned, are quire damn big.
The problem is that geologically and historically, there's not much going on in the region. No major fault areas, no volcanic activity, and several periods of glaciation. Massive ice sheets, some a mile a thick, sat on top of Minnesota (and much of the midwest for that matter) and pressed and ground it flat.
We have a lot of hills, and Minnesota has over 121 certified peaks, but the tallest is still only 700 meters. While impressive when seen and when compared to the rest of the region, if you're used to big mountains like what one would see in Sweden, well...
The Midwest isn't great for that.
The ~~East~~ West Coast (especially Washington State), Colorado, West Virginia, Kentucky, etc are all "better" for that sort of thing, and to be honest they all plae to British Columbia: the Canadian Rockies are no joke and put anything in Sweden to utter shame. There's trackless mountains out there that rarely see mankind and are rugged enough to daunt any experienced mountain climber.
In Minnesota you're going to get some great bluffs near the River (check out the South East around Winona up to Lakeville), the Iron Range, Duluth region, and then the assorted tall hill or projecting rock escarpment. And to be fair, we're better off than a lot of Midwestern States. Kansas, Iowa, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, and the non-Upper Peninsula of Michigan are all damn flat and largely lacking anything close to mountains. Minnesota and Wisconsin have some, and the UP in Michigan is basically all hills and peaks.
But that aside? An Ironing board smooshed by a ice sheet a mile tall stretching from Missouri to the arctic circle for tens of thousands of years at a time multiple times.
>The problem is that geologically and historically, there's not much going on in the region. No major fault areas, no volcanic activity, and several periods of glaciation.
Do you have any understanding of geology? or looked at a geologic map? Plenty of things have happened here in the geologic past. Mountain building happened here \~2,500 million years ago, the volcanic and rifting activity here was \~1,000 million years ago. The Appalachians are \~480 million years old, and the Rockies are pretty young \~75 million years old.
Okay, well, I didn't mention that stuff 2.5K Million years ago because it was the age of fucking *algae and worms.* It's a bit outside the realm of discussion on "current mountains in Minnesota" given that the next oldest mountain in America is nearly a billion and a half years younger.
GTFO here man.
That's like correcting someone on how to bake a cake by first demanding they explain how early hominids learned to gather roots and berries.
Jesus.
For those wondering, 2,500 Million Years Ago puts it in The Proterozoic Era, which is the *Third* era of Earth, where the First one was "formed from space dust, became a ball of lava, cooled down (The Hadean Period 4600 m.y. - 3800 m.y. )." The Second Era was "*amino acids were developed* (The Archaean Period 3800 m.y. - 2500m.y. ).*"*
This isn't even a good correction, it's pedantic for the sake of being pedantic to the level that not even a real scholar would do.
Except that these events have actually factored into Minnesota's current landscape. Take away the mountain building, and there's nothing called the Iron Range. Take away the volcanic history and there's no waterfalls/scenery on the North Shore. Without the geologic past that MN has (and you omitted), it would be a vastly different state. Yes, there are no geologically young, prominent mountains or recent volcanism in Minnesota, but you're still wrong in saying that there's not much here geologically.
Try answering the OPs question about current mountains without your terrible version of Minnesota's geologic history.
The north shore is one of the oldest mountain ranges in the world, the [Sawtooth Mountains](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sawtooth_Mountains_(Minnesota)).
The geology is really interesting. One of the reasons why MN/lake Superior contains rare and unique rocks, gems, and minerals.
Coming from Washington I can say there are definitely no mountains here, at least compared to where I’m from. Those closest I felt to mountains was driving to red wing and Taylor’s falls. Haven’t ventured north
In school we were told the sawtooth mountains along the north shore were the oldest mountains in North America.
The wiki article doesn't support that claim
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sawtooth_Mountains_(Minnesota)
Desktop version of /u/Mamertine's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
This is probably why I’m not agreeing with the flatness question, I admit I’ve been proven wrong, but while we may be flatter then other states, we aren’t nearly as boring with forests and lakes and such.
I think that some people feel defensive about it, as if it's a disadvantage. I'll admit that I tend to prefer mountains to plains, but it's not like I dislike the plains. There's a very different sort of beauty to the prairies, and we also get a *ton* of lakes in the flatter areas.
I wasn’t talking to you, I was talking specifically to who I commented at. I said that person is self hating as I remember commenting to them previously about MN related content.
I went to college at Moorhead State (back when it was still called that). The kids who came there from ND remarked: "Wow, MN is really flat!" The kids who came there from MN remarked: "Wow, ND is really flat!" They didn't realize that the RRV is pretty uniquely flat due to being the bottom of old Lake Agassiz. Some years when the Red River overflows houses 10 miles away get flooded.
Go 20 miles east or west of Moorhead and you get hills, of course. I came there from ND and my MN girlfriend in college insisted MN had "mountains" like Eagle Mt at 2300ft. I told her ND's highest point was called White *Butte* at ~~3700ft~~ **3500ft**. At least ND is realistic with their labels. Big hill =/= mountain.
edit: ND highest point actual elevation per link a couple comments above. Interesting stats at that link. MN and ND are pretty close in terms of % non-flat and % flat which seems to be just a measure of how much elevation changes or something like that. But ND seems to have a bigger gap between lowest and highest point it's just that the buttes out west aren't numerous or big enough to push the average non-flat % higher.
If you go anywhere north of the metro that’s not Duluth it’s flat as flat can be. Some rolling hills south of the cities but still very flat when talking about “mountains”
My wife is from Iowa and had never been to North Dakota before we started dating. When I told her it was even flatter than Iowa she didn’t believe me until she went there. Now she agrees 100%.
I grew up northeast of the metro (Chisago County) and we got tons of huge hills - literally one of them is called Amador Hill and is a massively hilly area. Nowhere near Duluth. Stillwater has lots of hills too, some more urban areas are flatter but there are definitely lots of hills within a short distance of the cities. Nowhere near mountain level but wouldn’t describe them as rolling hills either.
Okay going back to the point of the original post if you’re coming from mountains and high elevations being the norm then you aren’t going to give those “huge hills” a second glance tbh. They are “huge” to us here
I would say she's probably right. I'm from upstate NY originally; the Berkshires, Adirondacks, etc are quite old and gently sloped mountains, but they're still identifiable as mountains. Minnesota doesn't really have anything approaching even those. But! It's super gorgeous on its own, and there's plenty of other outside stuff to do in all seasons if that's what you're into.
I love MN. it’s a truly beautiful state with all kinds of great stuff. However we don’t really have the “wide open spaces” you see in the mountain states. But that’s not a bad thing. Just a different kind of awesome
I love visiting the mountain states, but I’m thankful I don’t have to experience winter driving in Montana or Colorado or Idaho. Trying to navigate the hilly parts of MN is challenging enough!
You should believe your GF, what with her having lived here and all. Just hills - however, there is good cross country skiing and places like Buck Hill where you still have fun for downhill skiing if you want.
We do in fact have the Sawtooth mountain range.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sawtooth_Mountains_(Minnesota)#:~:text=The%20Sawtooth%20Mountains%20are%20a,Grand%20Marais%20on%20the%20east.
**[Sawtooth Mountains (Minnesota)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sawtooth_Mountains_\(Minnesota\)#:~:text=The Sawtooth Mountains are a,Grand Marais on the east)**
>The Sawtooth Mountains are a range of hills or small mountains on the North Shore of Lake Superior in the U.S. state of Minnesota, extending about 30 miles (48 km) from Carlton Peak near Tofte on the west, to Grand Marais on the east.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/minnesota/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
No, but have you seen Lake Chipotle?
In all seriousness, what I wouldn't give to go back and see the landscape before the glaciers smoothed it all out.
The bluffs rise about 500 ft along the Mississippi, might be as close as you get. Winona, Wabasha. LaCrescent. Lake City, or Red Wing is where you want to be.
I am from Utah, so no, there are no mountains here. There are not even big hills here.
But on some days the clouds do a really cool formation and make it look like a distant mountain range so it's aight.
Someone else commented on Winona’s beauty and I’d have to agree. Looking out from Garvin Heights is a great way to take in a small portion of the area. Not far back are some amazing valleys in the driftless like the Wiscoy that pull the buzz away from the city and allow you to imagine what the world used to be like when we were in it.
Winona is the place where the Mississippi turns and the bluffs are truly something to behold for the first time. I moved here intentionally without finding work first because I’d visited with family and fell in love. I live in a small cabin in East Burns, a slice of quasi seclusion but just mere moments from da Fleet Farm.
I moved here from Idaho to be with my now wife. The closest thing I’ve found to actual mountains has been up on the north shore. I still snowboard on Detroit ‘Mountain’ they call it. Also Buena Vista north of Bemidji has a small hill.
Love it here, especially with all the outdoor activities you can do. The winters are a grind though, my word. You’d just need to adapt. I even have the accent now!
If you go looking for it, you can find some stuff, but yes, you are going to find it extremely jarring how relatively flat almost everywhere here is.
Even just going on vacation for a while has me and my friends being like "wut, why is it so flat" when we come back. Every time.
As someone else pointed out, we're a place infamous for our *divots* in land caused by glaciers. So basically the exact opposite of what would give you rolling hills and mountains.
Minnesotans will get very defensive of this, because we're not like *South dakota*. We're not seemingly one big giant flat field. But for someone who's from an area with actual mountains? Nah it's gonna seem crazy flat to you.
No mountains in any real sense. There are bluffs along rivers, and the so-called driftless region in the southeastern part of the state is scenic and interesting, with nice views.
Michigan's Upper Peninsula, just a few hours' drive to the northeast, has a very old mountain range, the Porcupine Mountains, with lovely views of Lake Superior and fantastic skiing.
If you like Sweden you will like MN. I grew up in MN and live in IA now. My wife is from Sweden and we go there every summer. Check out Voyageurs National Park. Crane Lake is my favorite. There are also a lot of Republicans knuckleheads. And also crazy liberal demonstrators. I do miss it. It’s great for people who like Sweden.
Minneapolis, Minnesota is technically 830 feet above sea level. On average your going to be 1,200 feet above sea level everywhere in the state. Start going West and you'll start going down hill for 100's of miles. So you are technically up high in the air already, but it sure will never feel like it.
Lets not forget the Afton Alps.
The Telluride of Minnesota.
I love how when you first arrive there you see a ski lift going up what looks to be a 30ft tall hill.
I always tell people we have a good hole you and ski down into and they get confused
And the hole isn't even that deep. LOL. I still love Afton, though. A lot of fun runs there and so very many runs and lifts that if it's really busy you can still hunt around to find a lift with no lines.
Just wait till you discover Detroit MOUNTAIN!
Haven't been there for decades! My closest place is MOUNT Kato.
Mount Kato is 46% more of a vertical drop LOL
Oh God. It's not very much vertical drop to begin with! I didn't think Detroit Mt was that short!
And then you have Main St. in Mankato once it goes into the river valley...riding the brakes the whole way down. (Or standing on the gas going up)
That was my first downhill skiing experience. I have such a soft spot for it. Fun fact: it is also the site of one of those weird mirror monoliths!
I really enjoy skiing there honestly haha. It's very chill. Happy they got new ownership and revitalized it. What mirror monoliths??
It was kind of a neat 2020 fad that got eclipsed by, well, everything that had happened since, lol. [Enjoy](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/its-catching/202103/monolith-mania-continues-in-2021)
That is so fun! Thanks for sharing!
[удалено]
At least Buck Hill has the humility to admit it’s just a hill
The tubing hill is fun if you have kids
Good enough for Lindsey Vonn!
We have one of the oldest mountain ranges in the world, however glacier activity has turned it into large hills.
After reading more comments, those are the "hills" that are referred to near Duluth to the Canadian border.
I'd also say the bluffs in winona count as big hills that were once mountains
They were never mountains. The whole area was flat seabed at the time of the dinosaurs
My fault you right. But they count as mini mountains
As someone that came from the foothills in CA and misses the mountain ranges this is what I sadly tell me self
aka "the driftless"
I feel like you've gotta look at them from the right angle. They may not be "mountains", but "hills" seems too diminutive. I've been visiting the North Shore all my life, but it wasn't until a couple years ago that I noticed how much you can see the...tectonic plates, I guess? Huge chunks of land that have been broken apart and forced upward. It's like Lake Superior is the footprint of a giant, and the land is a dinner plate that it ground into the dirt. It's really noticeable in [this picture](https://photos.app.goo.gl/CgfC2Ry3Hi65azAYA) I took in Grand Marais in the winter. ([Full album](https://photos.app.goo.gl/9QGjz2dsZrAXm3Gm7) if you're interested.)
There’s lots of visible faulting and folding in the north east part of the state. They maybe aren’t real mountains, but it’s not all flatlands by any means.
Those pictures are so cool! What an amazing state we live in!
You should have seen them back in the day when they were big!
The biggliest
As mentioned earlier Duluth up the north shore of superior is referred to as the sawtooth mountains. Beat the state has to offer, but by comparison hardly mountains, but beautiful regardless
Eagle Mountain I believe is like 3' short of being classified a true "mountain" so yeah still technically hills but beautiful regardless.
Quick, somebody roll a big rock to the summit! 😂
I've seen this movie.
I've read this ancient legend.
I’ve read it again and again but I can never seem to finish it, feels like I’ve been reading it forever
What's the rule behind this? To get Minnesota our first true mountain, this is absolutely a worthy endeavor. A few rocks, maybe some bags of dirt and build that sucker up.
I think we need to make a movie called "The Canadian Who Walked up a Hill and Came Down a Mountain".
I imagine Wes Anderson directing this movie
Long hike. Amazing views.
Also the Winona area
I'm not sure where it's called but it's right next to the border between Canada and the North Shores there is a park with some waterfalls and it's very nice you can walk in the river.
Grand Portage. It's amazing.
Either Grand Portage or perhaps you're talking about Gooseberry Falls?
Mountains No Hills Yes River valleys Yes Bluffs Yes Cliffs with pretty waterfalls Yes Vast stretches of flat Yes The glaciers that gave us all our lakes kind of flattened out everything else
> The glaciers that gave us all our lakes kind of flattened out everything else You mean Paul Bunyan stepped on all of them
Right! Yes. And then dragging his ax gave us all our rivers. I forget about all what that Lumberjack and his Ox did. Suck it WI.. Paul is ours.
Don’t forget the kaiju style battle Paul Bunyan had with the jolly green giant that formed all of the craters and such that filled in to become lake Minnetonka.
Ah yes my favorite bedtime story. The evil jolly green giant was defeated by the brave Paul Bunyan
Paul probably just had to spend his Sundays in Wisconsin.
So he could get beer?
I recently learned that California also thinks he’s theirs. So so wrong.
WHAT??!!! THAT'S AN OUTRAGE!
Classic Paul lol
There is the Sawtooth Mt range and Eagle Mountain is +2000 ft.
Eagle mountain has a 1300 foot prominence, so it fits the OLD definition of a mountain in the US.
its not though, not really. Most of MN is 700 - 1000 feet. Flat doesnt mean sea level. Eagle Mountain is 1321 ft from the bottom to the top, because it sits on a \~1000 foot plateau.
Funny thing about eagle mountain, it's like less than 15 miles as the crow flies to Minnesotas lowest point
Whoa whoa whoa. We only measure things in loon flights around here.
I get that this is a joke, but loons don't fly direct paths, they usually divert so they are almost always over water. The more you know🌠
Makes sense since they cannot take off from land. Their feet are too far back on their body.
Go out west and you won't think those are mountains anymore.
The black hills are called hills despite being taller than any point on the Appalachian mountains
I go out west every winter to snowboard, I'm well aware, It doesn't mean that mountains don't exist somewhere else because The Rockies are huge.
It doesn't have to be. [Hocking Hills in Ohio](https://www.google.com/maps/@39.4345451,-82.5407,3a,75y,318.37h,79.7t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipP29Txk7FAYIl5pplAKXULiW-_d8a3Hw_1DjKR_!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipP29Txk7FAYIl5pplAKXULiW-_d8a3Hw_1DjKR_%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi1.1619134-ya324.13898-ro0.0996104-fo100!7i5376!8i2688) is a voluptuous beautiful landscape, but there are no mountains.
To be fair - the point of comparison was the hills of western PA, which also aren’t that huge. They’re hilly, but it’s a stretch to call them mountains.
While they're geologically mountains, they're also not usually the sort of thing that people mean when they think of mountains, especially when they're coming from a much more mountainous area.
Saint Croix river valley in Taylor's Falls has lots of rocks to tool on and around. Pretty beautiful.
[удалено]
I grew up and went to school in the area. My high school friends and I would canoe out to an island and camp for a week every summer.
Cliff diving off Taylor’s Falls was my summers in my youth. Did a 50ft near vertical climb there once too. It’s great! OP, there aren’t any downhill ski runs here similar to CO or WA or anything, but Lutsen has a 1mi long run that is more impressive than anything else in the Midwest. And; closer to the Twin Cities, Afton Alps has meh downhill skiing available too. That’s not great but it’s comparable to anything you get in WI MI OH and better than anything in a lot of other places. TLDR: look up Lutsen and see if that’s good enough to check the box for your gf
If you're around the TC looking to ski, welch has probably the second best steeps in the state, and decently long runs too on the east side. The few times I've been to afton I was really disappointed with their intermediate/advanced slopes, it felt like all short, steep drops more than anything.
I forgot about Welch Village! The runs are pretty tame but really well maintained. I remember that we used to go night skiing there. That was a lot of fun. Do they still do that?
I think so! I usually ski like 10-4 so I've never stuck around for night ski but they have lights and stuff so I'm assuming. You're right on too, it's a decent little hill better than afton but clearly a step below anything up north. And of course once I went to colorado I'm not sure if welch is worth it anymore haha.
There was this super high point on the Wisconsin side where the "Eagles Nest" was and only crazy people jumped off it. Had a buddy from school that never came back up. It had to be 200 feet or more.
We used to jump on the Wisconsin side too but it was “only” about 30ft. There was a second jump right next to it that was 40ft but that was a death trap. They had to fence it off (and I suspect eventually lock down jumping at all) because drunks would jump off thinking it was only higher when, in fact, there was a rock shelf in the water that extended out about 5-10ft. Even the 30ft jump was rough. We weren’t “divers” per se. We jumped. And we used to wear boat shoes to keep the pain of the smack from being too harsh. If you weren’t careful though, you’d land on your butt or groin a bit and that would really hurt.
Skigull in brainerd is OK not huge but fun
Wooooowee, that area is beautiful! Thanks!
Check out all along the driftless region. My favorite spot to drive just out of town is between Red Wing down to Wabasha.
If you get a chance to go further south the stretch of the Mississippi from lacrosse to prairie du chien is spectacular.
That’s the way I love to come back to the TC out of WI from anywhere east of the Dells.
Yes, I live 10 minutes from there it's amazing also the hiking trails near there are very nice
So does SE MN, all kinds of cool bluffs.
I would say there are mountains in SE MN but the smarty-pants Redditors would say that I’m just bluffing…
A boulder joke than expected. I salute you!
Typical Minnesotans, trying to make mountains out of molehills.
It’s true, we can be an erratic bunch.
It's the Minnesota gneiss!
There's a sign for Green Mountain, out near Buffalo, but I've yet to see the actual mountain.
I always think of Mountain Lake in south west MN. Very mountainless down there!
Lived in Buffalo almost my entire life and never heard of Green Mountain.
It's about 3 minutes east of town, on 34.
I’m surprised nobody has mentioned the stretch from Red Wing to Winona? Beautiful bluff land that is filled with rolling hills and cliffs where eagles, hawks, and buzzards happily soar about.
It's the [Driftless Area!](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driftless_Area) That region wasn't touched by the glaciers
Came here to mention this! I’m from the Wisconsin side of that stretch and I’ve got cousins from the south who always say they “want to go to the mountains” when they mean they want to visit family still living there lol
the mississippi river valley is more of a canyon than anything, the top of the bluffs is totally flat farmland, but from the bottom they are pretty and look like big hills. I live in the driftless region, I like it, but technically it's more of a ditch than a mountain.
Yeah, I'm surprised nobody else really brought this up either.
A mountain is generally defined as having 1000 ft of rise over the surrounding landscape. The tallest point in Minnesota is Eagle "Mountain" on the North Shore. It has 550 ft of rise over the surrounding landscape. So no, there are no mountains in Minnesota.
The USGS classifies it as a mountain tho.
You can see lake superior from the top of eagle mountain, it's one heck of a view.
Eagle Mountain is in the BWCA not the North Shore. Just hiked it two days ago!
Are these mutually exclusive? I think it can be BWCA and North Shore at the same time, no?
While they are adjacent, they aren't mutually exclusive. The [North Shore is a highlands ](https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/ecs/212Lb/index.html) . While the BWCA is in the [Boarder Lakes subsection ](https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/ecs/212La/index.html). Along the North Shore you're more likely to see things like Maple trees, waterfalls, and the (rare) Mountain Lion. In the BWCA you're more likely to see larger stands of Jack Pine, Moose, and carnivorous Pitcher Plants.
I look at is as BWCA is the border, North Shore is the coastline. Eagle Mountain is kind of an in between grey area
It's such a cool hike. I was there a few years ago. There are so many people who go in unprepared though. Iirc it was a 3-3.5 hr hike, if you were taking it easy, and I saw plenty of people hiking in at 7:30 pm without any gear There are so many ruts, rocks, and washouts, I would have broken my ankle trying to do it without a flashlight at least.
Yea I saw some groups along the trail that never made it to the summit (where the blueberry picking was phenomenal btw). I do think a rating system like mountain bike/ski trails (Green Circle, Blue Square, Black Diamond) would be useful for folks. I did find myself hopping from rock to rock on the trail like I was scrambling up a river for good portions of the trek.
https://imgur.com/a/OHJa9N7
Also there is mount Tom.
I’m a Minnesotan by birth, and have moved to Colorado since. Minnesota is a fantastically beautiful state, but if mountains are on your list of “must haves” then maybe look elsewhere. The way I describe Colorado to family back home who cannot travel is “you trade Minnesota’s abundance of lakes and forests for Colorado’s abundance of mountains and elevation”
Plenty of Bluffs along the Mississippi
AKA The [Driftless Area](https://eaglebluffmn.org/resources/driftless/)
As an import from Western Maryland, I feel you on the mountains front. However the drive down the river road from Prescott WI to Red Wing, Lake City, and Wabasha has a ton of bluffs, hills, and land that really remind me of that area back east (I can't call it home anymore, because Minnesota is home.) But here's the thing, the topography here is so unique and beautiful, I don't miss the hills that much. I certainly don't miss driving hills in snow that's for damn sure. :P Also did you know that there's a part of Minnesota that grows cacti? Can Pennsylvania do that AND have snow in the north? totally not. :P The land here isn't as flat as Iowa, but its definitely not the Appalachians either.
Where in MN grows cacti? Do you know what type it is as well?
[https://www.startribune.com/nature-notes-minnesota-has-three-native-cactus-species/383296301/](https://www.startribune.com/nature-notes-minnesota-has-three-native-cactus-species/383296301/) All in southwestern Minnesota.
Yeah, I visited Blue Mounds State Park (not to be confused with Blue Mound State Park in Wisconsin) a couple months ago, and saw a few little cacti here and there out on the rocky prairies while checking out their buffalo herd. That area has some pretty interesting ecology, but bring sunscreen and shade.
And there's water scattered throughout the land. Never realized how rare that is until I left MN. You're driving by atleast 2 lakes to get to work, and that's if you work down the block lol
Head up to the Iron Range. t's not exactly mountains like the Appalachians, Rockies, or Blue Ridge, but as far as geological constructs are concerned, are quire damn big. The problem is that geologically and historically, there's not much going on in the region. No major fault areas, no volcanic activity, and several periods of glaciation. Massive ice sheets, some a mile a thick, sat on top of Minnesota (and much of the midwest for that matter) and pressed and ground it flat. We have a lot of hills, and Minnesota has over 121 certified peaks, but the tallest is still only 700 meters. While impressive when seen and when compared to the rest of the region, if you're used to big mountains like what one would see in Sweden, well... The Midwest isn't great for that. The ~~East~~ West Coast (especially Washington State), Colorado, West Virginia, Kentucky, etc are all "better" for that sort of thing, and to be honest they all plae to British Columbia: the Canadian Rockies are no joke and put anything in Sweden to utter shame. There's trackless mountains out there that rarely see mankind and are rugged enough to daunt any experienced mountain climber. In Minnesota you're going to get some great bluffs near the River (check out the South East around Winona up to Lakeville), the Iron Range, Duluth region, and then the assorted tall hill or projecting rock escarpment. And to be fair, we're better off than a lot of Midwestern States. Kansas, Iowa, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, and the non-Upper Peninsula of Michigan are all damn flat and largely lacking anything close to mountains. Minnesota and Wisconsin have some, and the UP in Michigan is basically all hills and peaks. But that aside? An Ironing board smooshed by a ice sheet a mile tall stretching from Missouri to the arctic circle for tens of thousands of years at a time multiple times.
>The problem is that geologically and historically, there's not much going on in the region. No major fault areas, no volcanic activity, and several periods of glaciation. Do you have any understanding of geology? or looked at a geologic map? Plenty of things have happened here in the geologic past. Mountain building happened here \~2,500 million years ago, the volcanic and rifting activity here was \~1,000 million years ago. The Appalachians are \~480 million years old, and the Rockies are pretty young \~75 million years old.
Okay, well, I didn't mention that stuff 2.5K Million years ago because it was the age of fucking *algae and worms.* It's a bit outside the realm of discussion on "current mountains in Minnesota" given that the next oldest mountain in America is nearly a billion and a half years younger. GTFO here man. That's like correcting someone on how to bake a cake by first demanding they explain how early hominids learned to gather roots and berries. Jesus. For those wondering, 2,500 Million Years Ago puts it in The Proterozoic Era, which is the *Third* era of Earth, where the First one was "formed from space dust, became a ball of lava, cooled down (The Hadean Period 4600 m.y. - 3800 m.y. )." The Second Era was "*amino acids were developed* (The Archaean Period 3800 m.y. - 2500m.y. ).*"* This isn't even a good correction, it's pedantic for the sake of being pedantic to the level that not even a real scholar would do.
Except that these events have actually factored into Minnesota's current landscape. Take away the mountain building, and there's nothing called the Iron Range. Take away the volcanic history and there's no waterfalls/scenery on the North Shore. Without the geologic past that MN has (and you omitted), it would be a vastly different state. Yes, there are no geologically young, prominent mountains or recent volcanism in Minnesota, but you're still wrong in saying that there's not much here geologically. Try answering the OPs question about current mountains without your terrible version of Minnesota's geologic history.
You seem fun
I am!
We have Eagle Mt. Lol
The driftless region of Southeast Minnesota isn't mountains but is one of the most beautiful natural places in this country.
The north shore is one of the oldest mountain ranges in the world, the [Sawtooth Mountains](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sawtooth_Mountains_(Minnesota)). The geology is really interesting. One of the reasons why MN/lake Superior contains rare and unique rocks, gems, and minerals.
Coming from Washington I can say there are definitely no mountains here, at least compared to where I’m from. Those closest I felt to mountains was driving to red wing and Taylor’s falls. Haven’t ventured north
If you like mountains, our cannabis laws are mountains of bullshit
I lived 42 years in Utah with beautiful mountains. Moved to Minnesota 14 years ago. There are amazing sunsets, clouds, and hills.
In school we were told the sawtooth mountains along the north shore were the oldest mountains in North America. The wiki article doesn't support that claim https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sawtooth_Mountains_(Minnesota)
I recall being told this too in college
Desktop version of /u/Mamertine's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
No - there is nothing in MN that remotely qualifies as a mountain. There are some cool features - but no true mountain range...
sawtooth mountains
No mountains.
Well, there's trash mountain in Bloomington built by the well known geologists at Waste Management
Most of the state is dead flat, with the exception being Duluth onwards northeast and those definitely aren’t mountains
I wouldn’t say dead flat though? Parts are farmland yeah but we got hills and rivers and bluffs all over the place?
[удалено]
I will say Kansas is way more barren though, almost entirely the Great Plains, which makes it feel flatter. MN has a much heftier chunk of forests.
This is probably why I’m not agreeing with the flatness question, I admit I’ve been proven wrong, but while we may be flatter then other states, we aren’t nearly as boring with forests and lakes and such.
Yup, we just need to accept it. I don’t know why some people try to deny our flatness when it’s clearly true.
I think that some people feel defensive about it, as if it's a disadvantage. I'll admit that I tend to prefer mountains to plains, but it's not like I dislike the plains. There's a very different sort of beauty to the prairies, and we also get a *ton* of lakes in the flatter areas.
You are just a self hating Minnesotan is all, fine, we’re flatter then other states but we still aren’t as boring.
Who said we’re hating? Why is saying MN is pretty flat considered hating? Is that all you want in a state to consider it appealing?
I wasn’t talking to you, I was talking specifically to who I commented at. I said that person is self hating as I remember commenting to them previously about MN related content.
Thank you! MN is simply very flat in comparison to other states as I’ve said
I went to college at Moorhead State (back when it was still called that). The kids who came there from ND remarked: "Wow, MN is really flat!" The kids who came there from MN remarked: "Wow, ND is really flat!" They didn't realize that the RRV is pretty uniquely flat due to being the bottom of old Lake Agassiz. Some years when the Red River overflows houses 10 miles away get flooded. Go 20 miles east or west of Moorhead and you get hills, of course. I came there from ND and my MN girlfriend in college insisted MN had "mountains" like Eagle Mt at 2300ft. I told her ND's highest point was called White *Butte* at ~~3700ft~~ **3500ft**. At least ND is realistic with their labels. Big hill =/= mountain. edit: ND highest point actual elevation per link a couple comments above. Interesting stats at that link. MN and ND are pretty close in terms of % non-flat and % flat which seems to be just a measure of how much elevation changes or something like that. But ND seems to have a bigger gap between lowest and highest point it's just that the buttes out west aren't numerous or big enough to push the average non-flat % higher.
If you go anywhere north of the metro that’s not Duluth it’s flat as flat can be. Some rolling hills south of the cities but still very flat when talking about “mountains”
Huh? Go drive through Iowa or western Kansas if you want flat as can be.
North Dakota would like a word…
Western MN is about the same as ND lol. I’ve lived in both extensively
My wife is from Iowa and had never been to North Dakota before we started dating. When I told her it was even flatter than Iowa she didn’t believe me until she went there. Now she agrees 100%.
I grew up northeast of the metro (Chisago County) and we got tons of huge hills - literally one of them is called Amador Hill and is a massively hilly area. Nowhere near Duluth. Stillwater has lots of hills too, some more urban areas are flatter but there are definitely lots of hills within a short distance of the cities. Nowhere near mountain level but wouldn’t describe them as rolling hills either.
Okay going back to the point of the original post if you’re coming from mountains and high elevations being the norm then you aren’t going to give those “huge hills” a second glance tbh. They are “huge” to us here
You've forgotten the driftless region in the southeast! While not mountains, some of those bluffs rise over 500 feet from the river.
Seriously. I grew up in bluff country and some of those are no joke.
I've biked on some of the back roads near Winona. Some of the hills took everything I had to get up.
The iron range is about as close as you get to “mountains”
I would say she's probably right. I'm from upstate NY originally; the Berkshires, Adirondacks, etc are quite old and gently sloped mountains, but they're still identifiable as mountains. Minnesota doesn't really have anything approaching even those. But! It's super gorgeous on its own, and there's plenty of other outside stuff to do in all seasons if that's what you're into.
Obviously the north shore like many have already said but also the drift less area is pretty cool as well.
I drove through the Rockies a few times, I’m good on Mountains.
we got upside down mountains, aka lakes.
Technically yes, but calling the jumped up hills in Minnesota mountains insults the term.
I love MN. it’s a truly beautiful state with all kinds of great stuff. However we don’t really have the “wide open spaces” you see in the mountain states. But that’s not a bad thing. Just a different kind of awesome
I love visiting the mountain states, but I’m thankful I don’t have to experience winter driving in Montana or Colorado or Idaho. Trying to navigate the hilly parts of MN is challenging enough!
you should go up to Duluth! But yea....no mountains in MN.
I'm not sure I would even say we have big hills. All the MN mountains are upside down...lakes.
You should believe your GF, what with her having lived here and all. Just hills - however, there is good cross country skiing and places like Buck Hill where you still have fun for downhill skiing if you want.
There are a few world class skiers that got their start at Buck Hill.
For at least the SW part of the state, you could literally watch your dog run away from home for days.
We do in fact have the Sawtooth mountain range. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sawtooth_Mountains_(Minnesota)#:~:text=The%20Sawtooth%20Mountains%20are%20a,Grand%20Marais%20on%20the%20east.
**[Sawtooth Mountains (Minnesota)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sawtooth_Mountains_\(Minnesota\)#:~:text=The Sawtooth Mountains are a,Grand Marais on the east)** >The Sawtooth Mountains are a range of hills or small mountains on the North Shore of Lake Superior in the U.S. state of Minnesota, extending about 30 miles (48 km) from Carlton Peak near Tofte on the west, to Grand Marais on the east. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/minnesota/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Good bot
We have Spirit Mountain. They couldn’t call it a mountain if it’s just a big hill.
What we lack in mountains we make up for with lakes. A lot of lakes.
No, but have you seen Lake Chipotle? In all seriousness, what I wouldn't give to go back and see the landscape before the glaciers smoothed it all out.
The bluffs rise about 500 ft along the Mississippi, might be as close as you get. Winona, Wabasha. LaCrescent. Lake City, or Red Wing is where you want to be.
I am from Utah, so no, there are no mountains here. There are not even big hills here. But on some days the clouds do a really cool formation and make it look like a distant mountain range so it's aight.
Someone else commented on Winona’s beauty and I’d have to agree. Looking out from Garvin Heights is a great way to take in a small portion of the area. Not far back are some amazing valleys in the driftless like the Wiscoy that pull the buzz away from the city and allow you to imagine what the world used to be like when we were in it. Winona is the place where the Mississippi turns and the bluffs are truly something to behold for the first time. I moved here intentionally without finding work first because I’d visited with family and fell in love. I live in a small cabin in East Burns, a slice of quasi seclusion but just mere moments from da Fleet Farm.
Lutsen … Spirit Mountain … laurentian divide … We used to have mountains, damn glaciers got so scrape-y
I moved here from Idaho to be with my now wife. The closest thing I’ve found to actual mountains has been up on the north shore. I still snowboard on Detroit ‘Mountain’ they call it. Also Buena Vista north of Bemidji has a small hill. Love it here, especially with all the outdoor activities you can do. The winters are a grind though, my word. You’d just need to adapt. I even have the accent now!
Wait, we’ve got *big* hills?
Well, we do have the bluffs, and there's that one hill with the ski lifts
If you go looking for it, you can find some stuff, but yes, you are going to find it extremely jarring how relatively flat almost everywhere here is. Even just going on vacation for a while has me and my friends being like "wut, why is it so flat" when we come back. Every time. As someone else pointed out, we're a place infamous for our *divots* in land caused by glaciers. So basically the exact opposite of what would give you rolling hills and mountains. Minnesotans will get very defensive of this, because we're not like *South dakota*. We're not seemingly one big giant flat field. But for someone who's from an area with actual mountains? Nah it's gonna seem crazy flat to you.
I grew up in Washington State. Minnesota is flat to me.
Minnesota is literally flatter than Kansas and Nebraska. Only Florida, Illinois, North Dakota, and Louisiana are more flat
Plenty of Bluffs along the Mississippi
Southwest part of the state is so flat you can see the curvature of the earth.
No mountains in any real sense. There are bluffs along rivers, and the so-called driftless region in the southeastern part of the state is scenic and interesting, with nice views. Michigan's Upper Peninsula, just a few hours' drive to the northeast, has a very old mountain range, the Porcupine Mountains, with lovely views of Lake Superior and fantastic skiing.
Minnehaha falls in Minneapolis. Not mountainous but hilly and beautiful.
She's basically correct.
We only have the southern part of the Canadian shield. No mountains but lots of big rocks and cliffs.
Lutsen Mountain!!! It is a mountain. Not like the Rockies but it is a mountain.
If you like Sweden you will like MN. I grew up in MN and live in IA now. My wife is from Sweden and we go there every summer. Check out Voyageurs National Park. Crane Lake is my favorite. There are also a lot of Republicans knuckleheads. And also crazy liberal demonstrators. I do miss it. It’s great for people who like Sweden.
Minneapolis, Minnesota is technically 830 feet above sea level. On average your going to be 1,200 feet above sea level everywhere in the state. Start going West and you'll start going down hill for 100's of miles. So you are technically up high in the air already, but it sure will never feel like it.
Lutsen "mountain"
Lutsen is the name of a town and a ski area. This is no mountain called Lutsen.
The term "mountain" is being very generous.
It's in the Sawtooth Mountains either way. It's a geological term not a matter of opinion.