2014 Update: Blob Rock, Bitty Buttress, and all seasonal raptor closure areas on U.S. Forest Service land will be re-opened August 1, 2014 for climbing.
Each year, Boulder Canyon raptor nesting area closures are in effect starting February 1st through July 31st at Eagle Rock, Security Risk, Blob Rock, and Bitty Buttress. However, the area is monitored and closures are periodically lifted early (due to no active nest, nest site failure, or early fledging). This monitoring program is a partnership with the Forest Service Boulder Ranger District, Boulder Climbing Community, and Audubon Society. Check back periodically during times of closure for updates. More info at www.fs.usda.gov/recmain/arp/recreation.
This information is a public crowdsourcing effort between the Access Fund,
and Mountain Project. You should confirm closures, restrictions, and/or related dates.
Start at a short steep wall 30' right of Animation/Jaycene's Dance. Climb the steep wall past two bolts (crux), then angle right and up easier (5.7-5.8) rock to the top.
Less sustained than Animation, but with a harder crux.
9 bolts to a 2-bolt anchor. The pitch is about 85' long; a 60m rope needed to descend. There is a long runout between the 8th and 9th bolts on easy ground; you may want to bring some small-to-medium gear for this section.
Chris, I too led this during high winds, and I also became quite "animated"!
By George Bell From: Boulder, CO Sep 19, 2004 rating: 5.9+5c17VI17E1 5a
The opening moves of this sucker are tricky to figure out, it seemed to us the easiest way is not really where the bolt is. You can stand on a flake to clip the bolt, but then you have to somehow go back left, maybe even retreating to the ground and starting farther left. From the flake, we traversed and then cranked straight up; this would be a pretty scary sequence without the bolt protecting you ...
The runout up high was indeed noticed! It does seem odd when there are 3 bolts in like 10' and then a significant gap, then one more and another 4' higher are the anchors.
By Peter Beal From: Boulder Colorado Oct 25, 2004 rating: 5.95c17VI17HVS 5a
I did this last weekend and would like to suggest that it be retrobolted. The bolts are very close down low and then very far apart up high. The gear you can place is OK but not located in line with the bolts (bring double ropes?) and the last bolt is barely three feet below the anchor. If the equipper could identify him or herself and explain why the route was put up this way, that would be helpful. Otherwise the route should be fixed, before somebody gets hurt on it.
I'm in favor of leaving the route as is. If someone is uncomfortable with the route in its current state, then don't climb it. And, as someone mentioned, there are gear options. And, please, don't lecture me on this being "sport climbing area" and no one brings gear. I do agree that a bolt 3 feet below the anchor after a substantial runout seems strange.
By George Bell From: Boulder, CO Oct 25, 2004 rating: 5.9+5c17VI17E1 5a
I agree, the route did not seem overly dangerous to me. The runout part is quite a bit easier than the crux, and you can always bring a stopper or small cam.
By Peter Beal From: Boulder Colorado Oct 26, 2004 rating: 5.95c17VI17HVS 5a
My point is that a climber can look at this route at the bottom, think, OK this is safe, then find out, quite a bit higher, that a 20-25 foot runout is mandatory. The next step is go for it or climb back down. Why bother putting in the bolts in the first place?
Clearly outlines the difference between the way a sport climber approaches a route and the way a trad climber would. A lot of routes bolted on lead are runout because the first ascentionist only placed a bolt where he could get a stance and where he deemed it necessary. There are a lot of bolted routes that are traditionally bolted and therefore runout on easier ground or where the FA couldn't get a stance or an aid placement no matter how meager. Solid Gold in J-tree comes to mind; Figures on a Landscape, too. The way it is bolted can sometimes full affect the character of a route. Even when a route is bolted one should read the route for runouts, difficulty of climbing near the runout, etc. Thinking for oneself and not assuming the first ascentionist cared about me or my safety is an important part of being a safe and competent climber. No matter how hard you pull.
I certainly would not object to another bolt in the runout area. This is not Jules Verne we are talking about. I am not sure why people who object to bolts even climb at Animal World. It is a moderately enjoyable route and I think Dan should extend it another 20 feet.The anchors are in a rather pointless location.
By George Bell From: Boulder, CO Oct 26, 2004 rating: 5.9+5c17VI17E1 5a
I wouldn't be upset if a bolt was added by whoever put up the route. The runout, in my opinion, is only about 5.6-5.7, and it seems unlikely to me if you can lead the 5.9 crux you would fall on a 5.6. I can think of 10 other sport climbs I have found more terrifying due to large gaps between bolts.
I found this route to be a good deal of fun. For me the opening sequence was quite tricky, even for 5.9 and from then on quite easy. In MHO the run-out is not "pointless" (thought it did catch me by surprise) because it adds some spice to an easy section of climbing.
Gary, I never said the runout was "pointless". I said the anchors were located in a pointless spot. You do the runout and stand on a ledge and clip a bolt. Then you climb about another 5 feet of nothing difficult and then clip the anchors above your head on an overhanging wall. The climbing from the ledge to the anchors adds nothing to the climb other than make a 50 meter rope not to reach the ground. I would like to have seen it extended another 15 feet above the current anchors to add another crux and have a second set of anchors at the ledge to facilitate getting to the ground.
By Tony B From: Around Boulder, CO Nov 1, 2004 rating: 5.9+5c17VI17E1 5a
So what are the ethics of adding length and bolts to protect said length to an existing climb? Seems to me it would be the same as adding a "second pitch" and if the climb were a sport climb, it wouldn't change the existing climbing or the nature of the route, it would just add an additional length to it. For my own part, if I had not sent a line to the top of something and someone wanted to add bolts to it to lengthen it, if it already had bolts, then I wouldn't have any question about it at all. Is there an ethic or standard regarding this that I am unaware of? Or could someone (in this case Greg) feel comfortable and beyond ethical qualms in adding another bolt and 15' of climbing to a different set of anchors and call it a hard extension?
By Peter Beal From: Boulder Colorado Nov 1, 2004 rating: 5.95c17VI17HVS 5a
Thanks everybody for all the reminders that climbing is dangerous. However the bottom of this route is anything but dangerous, while the top is "spicy", climber-talk for don't fall or else. For a naturally protected climb, this makes sense; that's the way Mother Nature intended it. For a rap-bolted moderate, it seems silly. This route could probably be lead all on clean gear, a little "spicy" in sections but no really big deal, difficulty-wise. That makes more sense to me than the current arbitrary set-up now in place, one that is bound to result in some kind of accident, sooner or later. Luring someone onto a route with closely spaced bolts down low and runouts up higher is irresponsible. Make it clear from the beginning what the route is like.
Greg, I'll give you that one. It does seem a little strange to a bolt so close to anchors after a long run out. My comment about pointless was more directed to the first comment on the site, and that just in general I don't mind when you run it out a bit on a significantly easier section of a climb. But I am also very much for safety and if people think this route lulls unsuspecting climbers into a false sense of security then maybe it needs looking into.
Does anybody know what the name of this Dan Hare (?) route is?
Also: perhaps this discussion is (long?) dead, but I'd add another vote for *not* adding more bolts.
I appreciate Peter Beal's perspective (the D'Antonio-esque access-for-all ideology, which is great if that's how you want to put up routes), but I tend to agree with the personal responsibility argument.
"rant" Pro opportunities are a fundamental part of *every* climb, sport or no. Suss things out for yourself, make decisions for yourself using the resources available to you (cb.com is major advantage over what we had even a few years ago in this respect...if you wade thru all the garbage), and climb it or don't. The FA party creates a line (and by "line" I mean the rock/pro combo): assess whether or not this line suits what you're up for climbing, and take responsibility for your own choice. If the FA party added enough bolts to make you comfortable, then great. If not, then this line isn't for you...luckily, there are about 10 thousand other lines within an hour to chose from! Finally, if you can't determine whether or not a line is for you with the resources at your disposal (e.g. eyes, brains, internet, friends, etc.) ... well, that's probably a good message that you might be better off moving to something else."/rant"
Old fashioned, and Anon by choice...
By S. Kimball Apr 1, 2005 rating: 5.9+5c17VI17E1 5a
Semi-pile, the runout is the best part.
By Cody Munger From: Carson City, NV Jun 13, 2005 rating: 5.85b16VI-15HVS 4c
The first move was easily done by standing on the flake and stepping up with your right foot on the big ramp. The lead was a bit scary since there was a bit of potential for groundfall on the first move. The rest was so pointlessly easy that I don't even think this route is worth doing. I rated it one 5.8 move with a lot of 4th class afterwards to my partners.
All the bolts seemed well placed, and the runout didn't bother me. Too bad the anchor wasn't placed a little higher so the last overhang could be part of the climb.
By Charlie Fried From: New York, NY Jun 18, 2006 rating: 5.9-5c17VI16HVS 4c
The bottom is tricky, but anyone can figure it out pretty fast (you are on the ground). The 30 foot run out is pretty intimidating at first, but whoever bolted the route figured, if you can lead up to it, you should definitely be able to climb a 5.6 to the next bolt, although I'm not sure why a bolt wasn't placed. Does anyone know?
By Mark Cushman From: Cumming, GA May 1, 2008 rating: 5.95c17VI17HVS 5a
Just imagine you're climbing at the Flatirons and the runout shouldn't bother you too much. The holds are all there and positive. Fun route! If you like, the route would go mixed with an assortment of thin to hand sized cams.
Caught my buddy on a fall off the beginning of this route last year. Well, I should say the bush caught him. It was pretty fun but even on TR there's a big potential for ground fall. Just make sure you got someone spotting you in the beginning of this one.
Phil, Rope stretch and the amount of slack out by the belayer (some climbers prefer a loose belay) could make a top-roped groundfall a possibility if the climber fell down low.
The best solution should obviously be to have the belayer keep a snug-to-tight belay for the first 5-10 feet or so, until rope stretch will definitely not be an issue.
By DamageVic From: Coal Creek Canyon, CO Aug 14, 2009 rating: 5.9+5c17VI17E1 5a
I used a green Alien somewhere around/between the 5th or 6th bolts and a black Alien between the 8th & 9th ("The Runout") bolts for good measure. The moves around the first few bolts are the hardest part and I enjoyed the rest of it. I did however stand on the boulder to the right and clip the 1st bolt, then started from the ground...a fall off those first moves could be ugly!
By Crag Dweller From: New York, NY Oct 4, 2009 rating: 5.9+5c17VI17E1 5a
Fun route. Crux is def getting past the 1st & 2nd bolt. Fun, easy climbing up top w/enough run out to keep you on your toes.
By Peter Sedivec From: San Clemente, CA Jun 21, 2010 rating: 5.10-6a18VI+18E1 5a PG13
First two bolts are the crux, most of climbing above there is much easier. I think the route is fairly well bolted, a bit of a space higher up but on some very easy moves.
Wonderful bouldery start to jug haul/easy climbing. Genuinely enjoyed the runout as the section is very easy and no place for natural protection (granted we had a very calm evening session). It lets you realize your exposure and how high you are in the canyon, adding a bolt would take away from this route (runout is not harder than 5.7). Stay focused and appreciate your zen.
By JJR From: Boulder, CO Jun 12, 2012 rating: 5.9-5c17VI16HVS 4c
Not a bad route. Did it while I was waiting for a party to get off of Animation to the left. First moves are the crux. To protect yourself a tad, you can climb up on to the big ass rock right at the base and clip the first bolt, then downclimb and start up left. After maybe the 3rd bolt or so, it's a jug haul. Fun, but a little scary on a really windy day... even though the holds are all super positive, the bolts are faaaar apart... if by some chance you take a fall, it's gonna be a big one. Worth doing once, I'd say, but probably won't go back to it.