New Route/Retro Bolt – I Can’t Copeland

This application is for adding lead bolts to the existing aid line “I Can’t Copeland”.

Route NameI Can’t Copeland
LocationSouth Buttress of Redgarden
FAKyle Copeland

Vote on this Hardware Application

You must be logged in to vote! Click here to login

If you cannot vote you are not logged in, or you already voted.

Approve the addition of bolts on I Can't Copeland?

  • Yes (96%, 24 Votes)
  • No (4%, 1 Votes)

Total Voters: 25

Loading ... Loading ...

11 replies
  1. steve a
    steve a says:

    Seems like a great route, but please make sure the 4 proposed bolts are adequate. No one wants a contrived PG-13 or R-rated route when it’s being bolted top down. Are the “microcams” protecting the 5.12+ section adequate? Hopefully ACE folks get a chance to TR and take a close look in that regard.

  2. Michal Matyjasik
    Michal Matyjasik says:

    Hey Steve,
    I am open to adding another bolt or two as necessary to keep things safe if the ACE committee agrees to it. The microcams are good but specific.

  3. Michal Matyjasik
    Michal Matyjasik says:

    I went back last night to refine all of the bolt placements. I am certain that the 12+ crux gear is totally bomber. There is a purple/blue offset mastercam followed by a purple mastercam that are both constricted and in excellent quality rock. The 12+ is safe to lead on gear only.
    However, as I was toproping, I realized that the follower would risk a swing over a somewhat-sharp lip if they blew the crux. Therefore, I propose that the route continue up and left after the crux on 5.10 jugs with the addition of a fifth bolt directly above the crux bolt to protect the follower (and the rope), adding a couple body lengths of high quality independent climbing before merging with the last two bolts of the Vaporizer.
    The application should be updated with this information shortly.

  4. nbb
    nbb says:

    I voted no – please put in a bolt at the crux – then I would vote yet. If those micro cams pull, and eventually they will, the leader is dead. A “bouldery” 12+ crux protected by micro cams is ridiculous even by the already ridiculous Eldo standards of super-wiring a route on top rope, then bolting it for a climber who doesn’t exist – then of course the route remains practically dormant. Rosy II and After the Goldrush, put up many years ago, have each had very few ascents, several bails, generally by climbers considerably stronger than their moderate grades, as per comments on This appears to be another example in the que – kind of a waste of precious rock.
    – Nate Beckwith

  5. Michal Matyjasik
    Michal Matyjasik says:

    Clearly you did not read the comments, Nate. The cams at the first crux are BOMBER and in excellent rock. I will give you a six-pack of beer if you manage to rip a properly sized, well-placed cam in those placements. I agree with your sentiment, however; I have no intention to create another rap-bolted EJ headpoint route.
    There are many climbers who will be enjoying this route as soon as it is open and conditions permit.

    • nbb
      nbb says:

      Cams that small will eventually pull. There is no range to take up movement in a cam that small. To have them at the base of a 12+ boulder problem crux that you only know from the safety of a top rope and death as a consequence – i disagree and my vote for such a thing where the FA is prescribing a risk for others to take that they have not – it stands as NO. Note also most other comments here are in line with my sentiment, from guys who have been around a long time and have seen a lot of gear pull out here in this park.

  6. Alkaitis
    Alkaitis says:

    Seems like a few members of ACE should go inspect the route and let us know about the gear placements. If the crux of the route is placing two small cams it seems that would be a distraction from the route.

  7. tonybubb
    tonybubb says:

    I’ve got to admit, a small, specific offset cam of a particular brand being solid is not the same as “solid gear” in common parlance.
    If the former is the case, but common gear (any given rack)( is unlikely to have it and be able to place it with confidence on arrival, then the route is R-rated for most people and may as well get bolted if you are bolting it.
    As this is a stated opinion that I am uncertain of, not an answer (I did not go check out the gear) I can not vote on it, but I side with those who suggest another bolt if it is an esoteric piece and placement and would suggest adding a bolt there to the FA/Permit requestor.
    But I still won’t vote “no.” I am not interested in controlling things at that level. Just suggesting what I think sounds logical to me.

  8. Michal Matyjasik
    Michal Matyjasik says:

    Photos of the crux gear have been sent to ACE members. It is placed from a jug before the moves of the first crux. The equivalent size of offset X4, alien, or TCU would work just as well, and I suspect a red C3 might work instead of an offset for the bottom piece. The top piece is a tight and constricted purple mastercam or green C3. The true crux of the route is undoubtedly the upper (bolted crux).

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply