[pct-l] boots and trashed feet

["Roger Carpenter" <rogercar@pacifier.com>]

Mountain Dave said:
>>I've been perusing various hiking journals on the GORP and PCTA websites. One 
common theme that stands out is trashed and butchered feet. So tht begs the 
question: is all this suffering really necessary or a result of people taking 
the ultralight method too far. I just have to wonder if all these hikers had 
stuck to the tried and true method of wearing good fitting leather hiking 
(not mountaineering - they suck too) boots, would they be suffering now? One 
things certain. The shoes they are wearing don't work. <<

Jeff E replied:
>>This leads me to suspect that at least half the foot problems that occur during the
first three or four weeks have as much to do with actual ground temperature as
incorrect footwear, and the amount of time spent walking.  <<

I believe Jeff is correct.  And no, the hikers are not taking the ultra-light thing too far.  There is far more to ultra-light hiking than footwear, IMHO.  Having hiked southern California PCT in both 1995 and 1996, wearing both running shoes and fabric/leather boots at various times, I can safely say from my experience that blisters occur with both boots and shoes.  Intuitively, I cannot imaging that encasing feet in thick, non-breathing leather would help prevent blisters.  In 1995 I had blister problems very similar to what the 2000 thru-hikers are now experiencing.  The worst came between Wrightwood and Mojave, when I switched to leather boots for my trip over snowy Baden-Powell.  Back in the heat, my feet were seared and blistered inside the boots.  The ground temps were unbearably high during parts of that segment.  One year later in 1996, wearing running shoes all the time until K-Meadows,  I had very few blister problems. Of course, my feet were still fairly tough from hiking 1,000 miles the previous year, and I cut my pack-weight substantially.  For thru-hikers starting in southern California with not many miles on their feet in recent months, some blisters are inevitable regardless of footwear.

I like to compare hiking footwear and automobiles.  Leather boots are like a full size Chevy (steady, stable, not very fast).  Running shoes are like an Italian sports car (light, quick, but require perfect sizing and maintenance).   Does this mean sandals are like convertibles?!!  What got me in trouble with my running shoes was not changing to larger shoes as my feet expanded.  I came down with tendonitis in northern California while hiking in shoes that were too small.  It caused me to walk unnaturally and this resulting in putting too much strain on the tendon running along the my shin, just above the ankle.  The exact injury occurred on the other leg while in southern Washington when I neglected to lace the shoes properly for more than one week.  In both cases I successfully walked through the injuries and got back to normal.  Despite the hassles, I still prefer the shoes for distance hiking.  Of course, it's just my preference.  I recognize everyone's needs and (ugh!) "comfort zone" are different.

Roger Carpenter
Vancouver, Washington USA

PCT 1996

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---
* From the PCT-L |  Need help? http://www.backcountry.net/faq.html  *

==============================================================================