Direct Cop Out 

Vaino, Moe Hershoff and I went back and added a direct first pitch to this route. Start near the pine tree and angle up and left to a bolt. Clip the first bolt and climb up and over the roof on cool holds. Continue up the face to the belay. Bring some small gear. 5.9+

Good route, but it should have been trad. We climbed it without clipping any of the bolts, with the only gear difficulty being in the vicinity of the old bolt in the middle of P2.

P1 has excellent gear near the bolts, except that pulling the ceiling the gear is underneath and a bit left. But the holds are huge, and it would be nearly impossible to fall, besides being only about 5.8. The old bolt at the belay directly above the ceiling may indicate that this obvious pitch (obvious due to the big horn at the lip) may have been climbed before.

The P1 belay gear was 3 micro cams, a 0.5 Camalot, and a medium nut, all excellent. However they are all in a 6" section of crack, so the anchor might seem a bit unnerving given the difficult climbing above. Perhaps one new bolt at this belay would have made sense, especially since it could be justified as replacing the existing 1/4" bolt.

P2 is a a tad spicy and trad (no old or new bolts) until a step right at an old 1/4" bolt. Had I clipped this bolt, I would have much preferred this bolt be replaced rather than placing the 2 new bolts higher up. Hard moves gain a finger crack right of this old bolt and fair-to-good gear gets you to a good stance at the steep right-facing corner. There are 2 new bolts here, both unnecessary. There is excellent gear below the lower bolt, and a good but small brass nut just a little lower than the upper bolt. The crux moves here are perplexing. You could escape left below the roof to a big jug or perhaps escape right. Where did the people that placed that 1/4" bolt go? And how much of this pitch is new, given the existence of that old bolt?

P3 is moderate and somewhat runout until you get to the right-facing flake. You can climb at the old bolt up and left of the belay (gear opportunities), or climb more naturally directly above the belay and then move left. The right-facing corner has excellent gear and is quite moderate with good stances. 5.8 or easy 9. Above the ceiling, though, it's very runout on humps, but maybe only 5.6 or 5.7. It may be possible to climb left or right on easier ground.

The descent gully pretty much sucks. Very loose.

Ivan wrote: Good route, but it should have been trad. We climbed it without clipping any of the bolts, with the only gear difficulty being in the vicinity of the old bolt in the middle of P2.

It is a good route and it was done trad.

Bob says: "...it was done trad".

Of course, I did it trad. Are you saying you did it first trad, and then added the bolts later? And that therefore the bolts are OK? Or what?

And Bob, what about those old bolts? Didn't you retrobolt an existing (mostly) trad line? Perhaps adding a minor variation. Or not.

Ivan wrote: Comments: Bob says: "...it was done trad".

Of course, I did it trad. Are you saying you did it first trad, and then added the bolts later? And that therefore the bolts are OK? Or what?

Yes Ivan, we did on the lead with hauling a Bosch up. As to it being another part of another route, I don't think so but I could be wrong. I talked to Jim Erickson and Richard Rossiter about the route and they thought that is had never been climbed before.

Funny that someone with your ability and hindsight does not put their tremendous ability to work doing some new routes. I would love to do some new trad routes in the area.

The route has been repeated by several people and they thought it was a good route in its current state.

Later, Bob

OK, Bob. End of discussion. To you "trad" means ground up hauling a Bosch. Interesting definition. My language was imprecise. I should have said, "it should have been done without bolts" rather than "it should have been trad". I will not apologize, since I'm sure you knew what I meant, and are twisting the words as you often do.

This is a fun route

Ken wrote: Well here we go again. I moved to Boulder in about 1978 and because there was no sport climbing.

You could of picked a number of climbing areas to live as there were no sport-climbing areas in the US.

Ken wrote: Myself and various partners would wander all over places like Boulder Canyon looking for new trad routes. This variation is one that one of my partners a very trad 5.11 guy used to love to lead me up, and I subsequently led it several times myself.

Funny, but for doing so much climbing in Boulder Canyon, your name is not associated with little if any new routes in the canyon.

Ken wrote: So this was established as a trad route long before a Bosch became a [piece] of gear on the rack. I know Bob will want written documentation of this. Unfortunately this is somthing I cannot provide. I just know what I have done and can state my opinion base on that.

Ken it is not an opinion. You either did it or you didn't! And just who was your partner on this climb. I would like to talk to him and if he led it I will remove the bolts. Fair enough? As stated before, I talk to Jim Erickson and Richard Rossiter about the line and they both said that they didn't think it was climbed. We cleaned (on lead) lot's of lichen and dirt and removed several loose rocks that would have been impossible to climb around.

Ken wrote: We used to do this route because it WAS protectable with the small trad rack we posessed. I remember doing this without Aliens and micro cams etc. So it is my opinion that this is just another example of bolts being placed on a climb that was previously led trad, just to make the modern climber a bit more comfortable.

You have a right to your opinion.

Ken wrote: The idea that these guys are claiming a first ascent on this thing dated July 5, 2002 is ridiculous as it has been climbed many times even in the 80's. Clearly this climb should be restored to its original state. This means to me the bolts should be removed so that it can be done as a trad climb without the eysore of bolts right next to cracks. Even if the bolts are not removed you guys still did not do a first ascent. Cheers, Ken H.

There are many new routes being done in the canyon and I doubt that you and your partner climbed-out the canyon in the early 80's.

Funny to think that people like Dan Hare, Richard Rossiter, Bob Horan, John Baldwin, Jeff Achey, Mark Rolofson, Alan Nelson, Roger Briggs and others found over 500 new routes since you and your partner cleaned up in the late 70's and early 80's.

As stated before, tell your partner name and I will talk to him. If what you stated is true, I would more than willing to take out the bolts.

Later, Bob

Hi Bob,

I still agree with Ivan that this is a bolted trad route.

Ken H.

Bob says: "...it was done trad". " we did on the lead with hauling a bosch up."

Jim Erickson.

Isn't including Jim Erickson's name in a post where you describe Trad climbing as "leading hauling a bosch" blasphemous?

Mr. D'Antonio has continually exercised his belief to be able to expand the definition of the possibilities. Mr. D'Antonio, efforts, energy, commitment and imagination given to the creation of new climbing routes is well known. I personally thank you for the many enjoyable hours that I have experienced as a result of your efforts. Mr.Rezucha also has contributed significantly to new route development as Mr. D'Antonio can attest to. Perhaps of greater value is Ivan's honesty and commitment to the integrity of the "traditional" climbing style. As a climber, I have neither the energy or imagination of Mr. D'Antonio or the high standards of personal climbing behavior of Mr. Rezucha. With this disqualification, I offer the following observations regarding the route: Direct Cop Out, located on the Wall of Winter Warmth. The route passed over terrain that undoubtedly was previously climbed. The evidence of aging bolts and close proximity to other established routes would make it difficult to believe otherwise. Inept (like me) lost climbers of the far and recent past would, if they could, give testimony to this. However, this may be true, it is Mr. D'Antonio who has given form, and substance to the route. By his definition of the route he has created the route. "There is not order to the universe until man giveth"

Ivan and I experienced the route in an "on-sight, ground-up, boltless" climbing style. Neither the old "1/4" bolts or the new bolts installed by Mr. D'Antonio were utilized. I would like to understand the thought process behind the design placement of the bolts on this route. Even at my modest level of climbing competency, I found that the bolts were not required for safe, protectable climbing.

Belay bolts were located at end of first pitch. Why not at the belay locations of the remaining pitches? This would allow for a rappel descent versus the increased erosion and habitat damage caused by the gully descent.

The protection bolts appeared to be placed in order to force the direction of the climber away from the route alternatives near by. The two bolts at the crux in particular demonstrated this characteristic. Ten (10) feet to either side of the bolts, there lie seemingly easier ground. As Ivan states, the bolted route direction can be protected boltless. Though the intended direction of climbing movement without the bolts in place would not be entirely clear.

Is this the reasoning for the position of these two bolts? If so, the bolts location at this position is logical. Regardless of the answer to these questions to this specific set of circumstances the greater questions remain. Mr. D'Antonio has taken on a role of leadership and ownership with his prolific route creations. As such he also assumes the mantle of responsibility and the accountability that the responsibility implies for these routes. Perhaps, by asking the questions, the forthcoming answers will not only increase the understanding, but fortify the creative logic and contribute to its development.

Ivan. Chuck & Ken; like I said ; "90% trad"... Guess Bob will have to scratch this one from his FAs. Granted the 10% sport on Direct Cop Out is definitely his. Who's this cowboy Mugatu?

If I had to guess, I would say you drink beer with "Mugatu" Scott. Even without the sarcasm...I wanna party with you cowboy! (Is that from the movie Stripes???)

If however during our partying "Relax" begins to play over the speakers, fear for your and our safety.

This is a cool route. The first old bolt is not comforting while traversing the slab right into the flaring crack system below the new bolts (this felt like the crux, mentally and physically). I think the route deserves an "s" due to runouts in other trad sections.

The new bolts placed on this route are unecessary and detract from the quality of the climb. Since when has it been acceptable to spray new bolts next to cracks on already established trad lines? I climbed this route without clipping any of the new bolts and felt perfectly safe. I'm surprised those bolts haven't been removed yet. I know those bolts might be an old subject, but I just climbed the route yesterday and was pissed to see such a cool line get "modernized". I think the bolts should go!

As stated before, after asking Richard Rossiter, Jim Erickson and several other people, they didn't think this particular pitch was climbed. This area of the wall has several different options for climbing. I cleaned dirt, lichen and a few loose blocks off this pitch which gave me and Vaino the impression that the pitch was not climbed.

Matt-I understand your concern and how it is so much harder to climb a route and make assessments after the FA party has done much of the work.

Look at all the work Ivan puts in telling us about his climbs, how Rossiter's guides are wrong, the proper grades of the routes and pictures of placing gear.

Opinions on this route are welcome. actions are better. Maybe you (Matt), Ivan and Ken can take the time to do something about this situation??

Later, Bob

For every negative remark on this route I have gotten 5 times more positive remarks. Funny world we live in.

Actions speak louder than words, add a wrench to your trad rack and stop posting about it.

I liked the crux on this it has cool moves and has an old school feel

Ken- take the bolts out.

Neither you or Ivan have prove to me that this section of rock was climbed before we did it.

If I am wrong, I will gladly remove the bolts and fill the holes in.

I have climbed over a thousand FA and never once would placed or REMOVE a bolt on a route without the FA permission.

You claimed to climbed it...but you also claimed to have done many (FA's) routes in Boulder Canyon in 1978.

Funny that your name does not appear on many (if any) FA in the Boulder Canyon guide.

You also claimed you move to Boulder in 1978 to escape the invasion of sport-climbing in other areas of the country. Just what sport-climbing areas existed in 1978?

I think you are full of it! You know what a bottomfeeder is?

Later, Bob

D'Antonio-bashing has almost become an art form. Disguising your anti-bolt proliferation philosophy by making a retrobolt argument is pathetic. If you're going to say things like that, you better be willing to stand up and say who, what, when, where, how, etc.

Bob has committed to take the bolts out if you do. So do it ... if you can. If you can't, STFU.

Ken, as stated before, there were NO sport climbing areas in the US in 1978 and bolt proliferation was hardly an issue as well. Ken, your story regarding your background and experience has undermined your credibility to say the least. Fortunately, you can still be a success in the world without credibility on this website.

It's safe to say a lot of us will be tuning your contributions out from here on out. Thanks for playing.

It has come to light that the person who removed the bolts from Bucksnort Slab is Ken H.

This ethical debate is interesting, but I don't want to get involved. However, it seems that Ken's accidental use of a period instead of a comma in his first post has opened him to wide ridicule for suggesting that sport-climbing existed in 1978. Read the sentence with the comma instead of the period; it makes perfect sense and is nothing to get excited about. Save that for the actual issues.

I think it's silly that there aren't more mixed sport/trad routes in Boulder Canyon. The rock is very fitting for it, with some cracks and some faces. I know there are some crack-routes around that have bolts, with the argument that "it is a sport area, and some people wouldn't know to bring gear" and there are trad routes that are run out because no one wants them to be mixed seems silly. I've been to sport areas where cracks are left alone, and discontinuous routes become "mixed" with some trad pro and some bolts. It seems to work very well, the routes are described as mixed in the guides, and everyone who can't place a nut steers clear. I am not anti bolt or pro bolt, I think there is a grey area we are all missing. Why not have more mixed routes? Also, if the ascentionists (1st, last, 1st in 20 years, etc.) had to clean a bunch of lichen and loose choss, it would be fitting for them to think they were the first. I'm surprised that Ken H. isn't devoting his attention to "Rosy Cruxifiction" or other Eldo routes with bolts. It would seem like a better place to cry about than Boulder Canyon or the S. Platte.

This is a fun route

I must confess to a bit of confusion here. Maybe I'm missing something, but from reading Bob D's own description, it sounds as though there was fixed protection already in place on every pitch when he first climbed the route on the alleged first ascent. Bob, or anyone, if your ascent truly was the first, then what would explain the presence of the old bolts? Why wouldn't you just assume that the route had previously been climbed. The bolts don't sounds like rap anchors. I'm not trying to be a jerk, I'm just curious.

Also, just an FYI, I'm writing from the Boulder Library, so it would be a waste of anyone's time to try to trace my identity.

There are two old routes on both sides of the second pitch of Direct Cop Out. They wander a fair amount and avoided the sentry-box section of the second pitch.

The first pitch of the old route started way to the right and traversed in to the belay.

The second pitch uses one of the old bolts and then shoots straight through the box.

Like I said before, if Ivan or Ken can prove to me that section was climbed before...I will happily and willingly remove the two bolts.

Funny how Ivan can critique and criticize these new routes with the luxury of fixed protection in place. Doesn't matter if he used the gear or not, just knowing it is there and available makes it so much easier.

Ivan: please show us how it is done...not after the fact but before. Still a fair amount of new routes in the Boulder area awaiting your expertise.

Myke and Ben- thanks for all your hard work and the best to you both in future.

Later, off to the desert.

I too would like to thank Myke and Ben for all their hard work, and for providing me with the opportunity to waste months of my life and ruin a reputation I didn't have.

BobD wrote:"Funny how Ivan can critique and [criticize] these new routes with the luxury of fixed protection in place. Doesn't matter if he use the gear or not, just knowing it is there and available makes it so much easier."

Bob, I'm glad to hear you say that. Kind of deflates the tired old argument that "if you don't like the bolts, don't clip 'em".

In Ivan's defense, at least he's getting out and climbing all these routes before forming an opinion. Umm, much unlike myself. As usual, I really have nothing to add about the actual route in question. Signing off....

Bob said: Funny how Ivan can critique and criticize these new routes with the luxury of fixed protection in place. Doesn't matter if he use the gear or not, just knowing it is there and available makes it so much easier.

That may be true in general, but on Direct Copout the new bolts are in places that are totally unnecessary. P1 is ridiculous. The gear is excellent. P2 the new bolts are at the belay (is Bob suggesting we could quickly clip the new bolt as the belay is failing?), and at the crux where there is excellent gear a few feet below and decent although small gear almost even with the bolts. The only place the gear is the least bit sketchy is at the traverse right past the old bolt and the next move or two up, and, for some reason, Bob and Co. did not place a new bolt here.

Ivan

To beat this dead horse again...Bob's 1st pitch variation is better than the old obscure way of traversing in from the far right, overbolted or not. Regardless of the bolt placements or who did the 1st free ascent of the sentrybox this is a great pitch. Bobby D's all right with me...

Ivan wrote: That may be true in general, but on Direct Copout the new bolts are in places that are totally unnecessary. P1 is ridiculous. The gear is excellent. P2 the new bolts are at the belay (is Bob suggesting we could quickly clip the new bolt as the belay is failing?), and at the crux where there is excellent gear a few feet below and decent although small gear almost even with the bolts. The only place the gear is the least bit sketchy is at the traverse right past the old bolt and the next move or two up, and, for some reason, Bob and Co. did not place a new bolt here.

Ivan

Did it ever occur to you that some of the placements were possible because we removed several small, loose flakes out the crack after the placing the bolts??

Scott- thanks.

For what it is worth, I would advise Bob D. to believe Ken's account of his climbing. While he was my partner, he was not only always honest about his abilities, but of his previous experiances; which were many I guarantee!! It's a wonder Ken didn't document the very days (yes, plural) he spent on this route in the past since like most climbers he kept quite accurate diaries of his adventures. Overall, a very competent climber at the 5.10 level on traditional routes in the past, he now seems to be doing some harder routes while enjoying the security of some of the newer bolted routes. Also; I will attest to the Platte being a very special place to both Ken and Myself and believe Ken when he said he had nothing to do with Bucksnort.

Another go-nowhere thread on a go-nowhere topic. Nobody is going to agree on this folks- haven't we learned that lesson?

For example, let me argue both sides on a couple of issues.

To start, let me argue the route had been done before, and counter some of Bob's points regarding consulting with local authorities, and the condition he perceived the line to be in when he first got on it::

Although Jim, Richard, and others are indeed authorities on local climbing, nobody holds the crystal ball recording every passage of every potential line on every crag. Furthermore, dirt, lichen, loose rock etc. on a line is in no way conclusive evidence that the line is unclimbed- have you ever climbed in the Black Canyon, or even on some of the obscure pitches in Eldo? By the same token, the absence of fixed gear, or even a lack of suitable cracks in which to place removeable gear doesn't mean you are on virgin rock (people were onsight soloing FAs of 5.10 in the 70s, if you recall). Nor does a tired statement like "we cleaned all the protection placements when we did the route" mean much; any competent trad leader on fuzzy rock knows how to clean placements out of dirty cracks. If Bob is saying he cleaned these placements with a more aggressive methodology, I would then accuse him of chipping the route. Indeed, the complete lack of any sign of passage does not indicate the line is virgin.

Now let me argue Bob's point that he did the FA of this route:

If a particular line has never been reported or documented in a guidebook or website, and prolific local climbers are unaware of the route- if indeed there is a complete absence of information in any form regarding it- and if first hand observation leads an experienced (potential) first ascent party to believe the line has not been climbed, long-held climbing protocol legitimizes calling a (potential) ascent the First Ascent.

How about arguing style and bolt placements/locations of a FA?

A first ascent may be approached in any of several styles: ground up with traditional gear, as a rehearsed headpoint, ground-up using bolts, cleaning and placing bolts on rappel, or as a free solo. Each of these approaches is legitimate, but take your pick, it would be easy to find fault (or logic) in any of them.

How about bolt placements regarding this route?

The "modern" approach to establishing bolted climbs often entails following a line that may or may not be as direct, logical, or in any way similar to one chosen by a climber onsighting with a rack of cams and wires. Often, when putting in a bolted line a climber will choose the more direct, cleaner, and often more sustained path. This results in many fine sport climbs that present future climbers with the ingredients- difficulty, deviousness, problem solving, a killer pump- that make sport climbing so appealing and popular.

But what about those pesky trad climbers?

Well, from the strict traditionalist's perspective, the result (of the aforementioned sport-bolted line) may be a less "natural", overbolted, contrived, worthless tripe heap. It may offend their sensibilities, esthetics, or their belief that rock is a limited resource, that style is critical, ie. the whole argument that climbing is more than gymnastic movement, that it entails risk and calculation etc etc.

So, here we have another round robin go-nowhere argument with people getting a little too worked up. I understand Ivan's logical argument. I understand Bob's defense of his route.

In this specific example, a route was climbed in the 70s by someone who did not report it (I would give Ken et al full credit for their statements...innocent until proved guilty, eh?). Then, 25 friggin years later, a potentially popular sport climb has been established on this small crag in a heavily traveled climbing area. Not everyone will dig this route, but many certainly will.

This route is insignificant folks. Follow the Middle Path- there will never be agreement between either side of a debate perpetuated by those who hold their personal beliefs infallible, who are unyielding, who believe they are "right".

There are many fine climbs to do in Boulder Canyon- both traditional and sport. If you find some bolted route offensive because you personally can eliminate clips, by all means feel offended, skip the clips and finish the climb. Then walk away.

Likewise, if you find some under-protected traditional climb offensive because, in your view, it is dangerous and foolish, respect someone else's foolishness (i.e. do not retro bolt the line), walk away and find something else to climb.

Fortunately, Boulder Canyon has a rich tradition in both traditional and sport climbing, and there is a ton to climb there. Get out there and climb and have a safe and fantastic time doing it.Nobody is right here, folks. Apples and oranges.

I really liked the post a while back suggesting the "mixed" rack approach to climbs, and questioning why this did not happen in B Cyn. If there is gear, don't place a bolt, and record it as a mixed route so people will carry gear on it (several routes on Easter, Bell etc could be done this way). Oh well, who knows....

Hey, this website has turned into a big pile of crap because of discussions like this. It's hard to find any useful knowledge about many routes cause of all of these ethics debates. If anyone does take over this site I pray that they can save it from you nutjobs. Here is an idea, go climbing, come back home rest and reflect and when your fingers have the strength, type up some good info on the routes you did. Let people know the conditions, how the route was, rap stations,,, stuff like that. Do you guys wonder why the site moderator is calling it quits right after he complained about receiving 600 emails from tattletales about jerks. I am glad I don't live on the Front Range with all you pc lunatics who ruin everything that is supposed to be good with your arguments about what is right and wrong within your little climbing community. There are other things out there to ruin too. You people should be politicians not climbers!

I've been Ken's primary climbing partner for the last couple of years. I'd say that Jim's impression of Ken is pretty similar to my own. I can't prove that Ken climbed this route 20+ years ago but I do know that he's always been honest and forthright about the routes he climbs and the style in which he climbs them.

As for the suggestion that he had something to do with the removal of bolts on Bucksnort, I don't believe it for a second. He has no personal vendetta against Bob D. In fact, we've spent many hours climbing Bob's fine routes on Plotinus Wall and we both appreciate the time taken to develop those routes. Ken has far better things to do with his free time than chop bolts; specifically, he gets out and climbs.

The only thing that one might consider Ken guilty as charged is not spellchecking his posts. I've seen some pretty gruesome spelling and grammatical mistakes from other prolific posters here that completely changed the intended meaning of their posts.

I haven't climbed this route but it sounds interesting enough that I might want to try it.

Well Bob, unless someone is crazy enough to take over this site (I hope someone is...) You can finally put up routes in peace. I've always enjoyed your work, and would like to say thanks.

To all you AC's out there, you'll have to go find a new site to slowly degrade. SuperTaco's pretty racy I hear!

Hmmm, this route no longer appears on Vaino's website...

Dana wrote: Hmmm, this route no longer appears on Vaino's website...

Boy Dana, what do you think that means???

He must be a strong well balanced individual who can accept criticism.

He must be a strong well balanced individual who can accept criticism.

Most well-balanced individual also have no problem with signing their name to statement that they make. Kinda leave you out, doesn't it.

I'm not sure what it means. I guess that's why I made the post. I was wondering if he (Vaino) removed the route from his website because he removed the bolts. Just curious what happened...

Regardless of who did the FA of this route, I rather enjoyed it. You recommended the route to me several months ago (maybe a year?) when we met at the Eldo Market while drinking coffee.

Dana- I would tend to believe that Vaino is tired of taking cheap shots from AC's on this site.

And rather hear anymore more crap...took it off his site.

Sorry to be a little terse... hope all is well. Later, Bob.