White Trash 

FA was certainly done on or before 2003 as a T.R. (myself) but it was more than likely much earlier- it's obvious and it's below the anchors.
FFA: Bob, Ron & Greg I guess, because I don't know that anyone led it.
But that leaves to ethical question the practice of bolting TR's. Seems like a grey area when it's unknown and in a relatively unpopular area. So perhaps the question is bolting what could so obviously be one?

Tony wrote: Seems like a grey area when it's unknown and in a relatively unpopular area. So perhaps the question is bolting what could so obviously be one?

Good question.
There are a number of obvious (in my mind) lines (Fit for Life..etc) that were not climbed on that cliff and the Overlook.

We cleaned a fair amount of lichen and dirt off the route. We also came to the conclusion that White Trash was a better, cleaner line than Crack Up. This route does not interfere or take away from Crack Up in any way.

You can't toprope this route from the top of Crack Up. The obvious finish to Crack Up is to continue up and to the right on easy rock. You have to move 5-10 feet to the left to set up an anchor to top rope this route.

Boulder Canyon was considered climbed out a few years back. My partners and I have done over 200 (obvious and some are classic) new routes in the last three years and Richard Rossiter continues to find new and good routes.

I would suggest go and climb the route (as a lead) and then report your thoughts on it.

Later, Bob

Bob said:
"You can't toprope this route from the top of Crack Up. The obvious finish to Crack Up is to continue up and to the right on easy rock. You have to move 5-10 feet to the left to set up an anchor to top rope this route."

I guess I don't agree because not only *can* I toprope that route from the top of Crack-Up, I already *have.*
My then-partner & girlfriend did not climb as hard as I did and we made it a habit of TR'ing lines off of other lines. This was a way to get a no-commitment workout- no worries about me (who out-weighs her by ~50lbs) taking a buncha sketchy falls and slamming her around. After I was done she could choose to try as well or not with the knowledge of the grade... and with no big string of gear to be responsible for. I can't guess as to how many diversions and nearby lines I've climbed this way on TR.

Perhaps I understand your argument to be that it was not obviously such a TR line? OK, that may be right, maybe it's not obvious- it requires a directional. I reread my own route description written for Crack-up after doing this in 2003 and see my own statement. I placed a directional and went left to the top of Momentum Operator. So that would have been the anchor I used.

Tony wrote: FA was certainly done on or before 2003 as a T.R. (myself) but it was more than likely much earlier- it's obvious and it's below the anchors.

That's what I was addressing in my statement. It's not below any anchors.

Your last statement in your last post make more sense.