BoCan route with dangerous block: clean, chop, or do nothing?

There is an issue with the Boulder Canyon route 'It's Time for Change' at the Bihedral
It's Time for Change (5.8 Trad, Sport, 1 pitch, 90')

At the move onto the arete there is a large loose block. The space to the right is a tempting fist jam for an unobservant climber. The block could very easily be dislodged and is large enough to kill someone below. The larger blocks in the middle of the route are huge, though.

CDOT was notified and they went out and took a look at it. They were very appreciative that we contacted them. We suggested that the loose blocks could be scaled by them since there is a chance that the rocks could tumble all the way to the road. We said that if that couldn't happen we could simply remove the bolts. They replied that they think the rocks would probably get hung up in the boulder field below.
CDOT was cordial, but CDOT also has bigger fish to fry. They said we could either remove the route or trundle, but that stopping traffic while we trundle isn't something they are going to do.

There is definitely no fixed hardware review committee for BoCan - but if there were then the public would have a say in the fate of this route. So chime in with your opinion and your willingness to do one of the following:

option A: get at least 4 spotters on the road with radios at a lower-traffic time of day and trundle away. This obviously involves some unknown risks. It will also significantly alter the crux move of this short route.

option B: remove the bolts.

option C: Meh. Do nothing.

Block at the crux.

View of belayer and road below.

Small pinch point holding the rock in place.

Sloped footprint holding rock below.

Several more loose rocks. Lowest is loosest, and it might be holding in the ones above.

What happens if we trundle and big rocks go all the way to the road, with damage to the road surface (or worse, a car/bystanders)? How much will that jeopardize access or the relationship with CDOT? What sort of liability do the trundlers assume? Seems like a lot of unknowns to me. And for that reason, I wouldn't volunteer to help on a trundling job like this. Without CDOT giving their blessing to the work, it seems inherently risky with significant legal exposure for the samaritans who volunteer to trundle. Like they say... no good deed goes unpunished

Based on all that, I would suggest to remove the bolts.

I''m sure that's an unpopular opinion, but let's be serious. It's an unremarkable route, surrounded by MANY other routes of the same grade and style. The character of the crag won't be altered with the loss of this route. Those blocks can definitely kill someone. Maybe more than one if they run to the road. Why risk it? Why bother? We're not exactly short of good routes to climb in Boulder.

Send that shit! I vote A, with utmost caution

It is also worth mentioning that the FA party has suggested that if the trundle doesn't look safe, that he's fine with "chopping" (but we don't chop, we pull) the route. So no bolt war is likely to result either way, at least not over that.
I'm not convinced of any particular path yet, I'm kind of waiting to see what others think and why. I'd be inclined to pull it and leave it alone. My reason for that is that CDOT has been very good to us (have pulled/trundled at our request before) and is fairly 'pro-climber' when it gets right down to it. I don't want to create a negative situation for them, with respect to climbers. Right now they treat us like a responsible user group, and thank us for our vigilance. I'm just guessing here, but I suspect why they don't want this one is that it is really going to be pretty hard to do - and to get to, unless you are a climber... and really far off the road, so as not to be arguably on their right-of-way.

I agree with all the points that Jon H made with regard to liability and sanctioning by CDOT. A bad trundling outcome could result in access issues at best and the death of someone at worst.

Rock fall is inevitable in the mountains, and sometimes people get caught in it. The question is whether it is climber caused or natural, and can a particular fall be attributed to climbers. How soon is this block going to come loose due to natural shedding vs. climbing on it? Can that even be determined?

If the block looks like the natural freeze/thaw cycle will bring it crashing down sooner or later, then I think the route should be removed and a careful eye be kept on the block until CDOT decides it merits their intervention.

What about a third option? With the permission of the FA party, how about chopping the bolt above the block and the anchor and then adding another bolt by the last one before the block? That could be the new anchor. Of course, this would completely change the climb, but some might argue that would be better than losing the climb completely.

I agree w/ Jon and Tony.
Option: B

Option D:
Option A + put some bolts in the block and lower it down. Or piece it out and lower... Maybe some small stuff will fall, but with look outs...

This seems like a no-brainer. Pull the bolts. Too many bad outcomes with trundling are possible, and there are lots of comparable routes at the crag.

It's like moving a path further away from a known, live bomb. Instead of actually doing something about it, you just move the path around it and put up a sign.

So I do feel that option B is best, but is there a risk that some bird brain would rebolt it out of a lack of local knowledge? (ie, someone goes off 'the path') Is it super obvious that it is to be avoided?

I agree that there are plenty of other climbs at the grade.

So if you go with Option A, with the spotters and you trundle the block and it ends up making down to the road and hurts no one.... you may still have a huge block on the road, and you may end up doing some damage to the road. Both of which will probably result in CDOT having to come out and do something about it. Option A and Option C have the most uncertainty and the potential for something to go wrong. Option B has the least uncertainty, and the smallest chance for something to go wrong.

My vote is for B.

Trundle it. Better to come down in a manageable way than on an unsuspecting hiker/climber. If you're up for it, then bolt the block and lower it.

I haven't climbed this route, but I heard about the loose block on it years ago. One option that hasn't been discussed would be to bolt the block to the wall. Put a bolt in the block & chain it to a bolt in solid rock. If the block is too loose to safely do this, then the other two options are both valid. I have almost always been against bolt removal, but removing a dangerous route is a good exception.

The option of trundling may still be the best option, if it is just the one block. The block will still be there even if the bolts are gone. So someone could still potentially climb the route without bolts since its only 5.8.

The trundling should happen early in the morning before any climbers are approaching the crag & few cars are in the canyon. Spotters at the road are important to make sure no one is approaching. My educated guess is it will stop in the talus. On the other hand, if the falling block cleans out the other blocks it could be a massive rock fall.

The last option I can think of is gluing a small plague to the wall with a LOOSE ROCK warning.

Can the admin for the page at least change the rating to, "BOMB" and put the warning in the description? Someone has already added a comment, but who knows how diligent someone is gonna be if they're using the mobile app offline.

CDOT wouldn't know about these risks without that report, and they punted. It's gonna fall eventually, so I say trundle when you can do it safely for everyone involved: Option A

Mark Roth wrote:Option D: Option A + put some bolts in the block and lower it down. Or piece it out and lower... Maybe some small stuff will fall, but with look outs...

Good thought, but could also be a house of cards totalling much more weight than a person (or gear) is going to control...
Not to say a trundle is not an option, but to say, certainly, that control can not be assured.

With that, let's continue the discussion...

Also, can we figure out a weighting system whereas a person who goes and inspects this thing directly gets a bigger vote? (I speak in figurative terms of course, but I do advocate for offering the best informed opinion possible...

The three or four mid-route rocks

Re: stopping the route prior to the block(s)
The route is a continuation of 'Night Moves' which has a two bolt Mussy hook anchor below the arete.

blocks, bolts
I guessed on the approximate location for the photo comparison - take with a grain of salt.

The block outlined in red wiggles like a loose tooth. It is likely to be used while stemming up the shallow dihedral.
The rock outlined in blue is small enough to be picked up and thrown were it not wedged behind the massive yellow rock(s) of unknown depth/stability.
The crux block above outlined in green has moved a bit since this photo was taken in 2012. I think the block is oblong enough that it would either break apart or slide rather than roll. Same goes for the tooth. I doubt that the green rock would hit the red/yellow/blue, but any of them could possibly smash the hangers below.

The area below is also an optional rappel route. Many climbers opt to down-climb the ridge to skier's left.

Get cable swedge tool and strap it down with a few bolts. Or trundle it in the middle of the night with a crew of spotters.

Trundle in the wee hours with spotters.

Consider that with the bolt the block/lower option, sometimes the impact and vibration of drilling a hole in the loose block could send it before youre ready...

Darren Mabe wrote:Consider that with the bolt the block/lower option, sometimes the impact and vibration of drilling a hole in the loose block could send it before youre ready...

And I've already considered that the largest block, above the very loos block, is sufficiently large (and god knows how large in total) that "lowering it" is not something I'd be attached to the other end of... it has to be hundreds of pounds, at least.

Does anyone know how CDOT feels about the good Samaritans filling in any holes we make in the roadway?

Obviously they use specialized equipment due to the amount of patchwork they have to do, but I'm sure a half dozen relatively smart and good intentioned people could fix any damage done before rush hour.