To let my son wear trainers for his Silver Duke of Edinburgh expedition?

[Sparrow7]

I just mentioned to a friend who's son is also doing the expedition this weekend that my son will be wearing strong comfortable trainers and she was shocked and appalled! As a family we do a lot of walking and we all wear trainers as I have always hated walking boots. On the bronze trip all the kids with walking boots ended up with horrendous blisters and tired feet, whereas my son's feet were fine. The weather is going to be dry but I am now second guessing my decision as it does say walking boots are essential on the kit list (as it did on the bronze one).

It’s an accurate one though. Insisting on boots for walking is a cultural thing. American hikers mostly use hiking trainers, even over very long distances and rough ground. Unless you’re going somewhere very muddy hiking trainers/approach shoes/trail running shoes are fine.

That said, “Nike Air Max” sound like normal street trainers. If so they are unsuitable. You need shoes specifically designed for hiking. They will be more robustly made and have a grippy sole with lugs to grip on earth.

There is a huge difference between walking or hiking trainers and AirMax. The airman don't have the grip or support that a walking or hiking shoe or boot has. And yes he may get turned away for inappropriate footwear.

Something like this are light years from old style hiking boots
https://www.adidas.ie/terrex-eastrail-gore-tex-hiking-shoes/ID7852.html?af_channel=Shopping_Search&af_reengagement_window=30d&c=GS-IE-Categories-NonBranded-CPQV-PSPG&cm_mmc=AdieSEM_PLA_Google--GS-IE-Categories-NonBranded-CPQV-PSPG--NEW%20NONBRANDED%20-%20female-_-PRODUCT_GROUP&cm_mmca1=IE&cm_mmca2=&ds_agid=58700006656185298&gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQjw8cHABhC-ARIsAJnY12y2oHUp69iax7s0zWkQn83zmKgM6fD_qg-eEgUZbzLyCFNvq9g63JUaAjWlEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds&is_retargeting=true&pid=googleadwords_temp

Try breakin in the walking boots before doing the hike. Trainers offer no support on uneven terrain. A broken ankle hurts!

Seconding contact the leader. DD did her Bronze last year and the group leader was iffy about allowing her to wear her existing (and expensive) worn in and well-fitted boots as they're not a 'full' boot (deliberately - she's tiny and the full ones didn't fit correctly!)

It was only the fact that they were still 'proper' footwear, and not just cheap 'trail shoes' and that she's a European Scout with provable, extensive experience camping and hiking that meant she got away with it. They did kick other kids off for not having boots.

At Silver level they should be over 'difficult' terrain at least part of the time and the ankle support is needed. It's also worth noting that part of the point of the DOE is showing the individual can plan ahead and correctly equip for the expeditions, so your child needs to speak to his leader asap to discuss his case. Mum ringing to say 'we're ignoring the kit list cause I had one bad experience with borrowed boots 30 years ago' isn't the idea at all.

A few things.

Bronze is only one overnight and pretty basic terrain.

Silver is 2 overnights - so if his trainers get wet they will stay wet and cause more problems for his feet - however the current weather suggests this will not be a problem.

Silver should be more challenging terrain - so more risk of twisting ankles, heavier duty on the actual shoe.

Some places will refuse to have participants in trainers - in the end they are legally responsible for him and trainers will give him less ankle support. If he breaks his ankle then this could be a contributing factor so I think you would have to be prepared for him to be turned away because his footwear increases the risk of potential harm and they would be the ones dealing with that.

This all should have been checked long before, but speak to the organisers now to see what they think - it's not really your decision, it's theirs.

My son always struggled with hiking boots. We got him hiking trainers and he has been delighted with them. Still have the traction needed plus waterproof. But crucially way lighter on feet so he doesn’t tire as easily.

Mine wore his trail running shoes for his bronze. It was a heatwave though, bone dry.

Nike Air max are really not suitable though.

It’s not so much about whether he’s ok walking in them - it’s whether he can walk in the AND carry weight (backpack). Boots give you more stability while carrying weight and he risks rolling an ankle otherwise. But if he’s good with weight bearing in his trained a then crack on.

I'm echoing others, but definitely check first. I'm a secondary teacher and we won't let them start the walk if they are in trainers, it's part of our risk assessment (to reduce risk of broken ankles), and we're really heavily scrutinised by the DofE for our safety requirements.
The step up from Bronze to Silver can mean a different kind of terrain, we are in the North West and our students end up walking through boggy, wet fields where trainers would be really unsuitable. We also warn students from turning up in brand new, unworn boots with 'normal' socks, as it's just a recipe for blisters.

OP kindly I think you're letting your own experiences as a child cloud your judgement.

Borrow walking boots from decades ago are a totally different kettle of fish to modern walking boots bought to fit the wearer. It may be too late for this trip but if hill walking is an interest it really is worth looking at proper supportive footwear designed for the task. You're letting your old negative childhood experience determine his childhood experiences. Airmax are in no way suitable for proper hiking and if he has heel spurs that's all the more reason for properly fitted shoes.

I hope he is allowed to go though it sounds like great fun.

I'm taking my "gentleman caller" hiking next month, I'm a big walker but he isn't. I've advised he wears his trail running shoes, as we know they're comfortable for him.

It will depend on the conditions and terrain, but I do think he'll need better grip than standard trainers, and he might have to live with wet feet.

Nike Air Max are not appropriate for a Silver DofE and he may well be turned away for them

I ditched walking boots in favour of trainers many years ago after I lost a big toe nail on a hike. They are way more comfy and don't weigh half a kilo each. Occasional wet feet is the price I pay but they dry quicker than boots and wool socks are still warm when wet.

Trail running type trainers, Salomon etc, are the way to go. But you only get 3 or 4 years out of them whereas boots pretty much last for ever.

At the moment, the terrain is likely to be dry, so it probably doesn’t make much difference, except that trainers provide less ankle support. They need to be proper ones though, not townie sort of trainers. I’m an experienced fell walker and I normally wear walking boots, but I walked the Camino de Santiago in trail running shoes because it was hot and dry. Normally, walking over high moorland I’d be in high top walking boots though.

Whatever he wears should be well fitting and broken in. I think the problem with DoE is that too many parents just order whatever online and their dc wear them like twice before. Of course, that’s going to cause all sorts of problems.

i do a lot of hiking and i do it in running trainers - i hate walking boots with a passion

Have they dropped the practice run for silver? Mine was a frolic in the park compared to the real thing, but the leaders did use it to emphasise the self-sufficiency and problem-solving expected of us. They should have critiqued his footwear then.

You're all wearing the wrong walking boots!

Proper walking boots - even the inexpensive ones - have soles which are designed to grip on wet rock, and the 4 seasons ones that go over the ankle support your ankles. I started walking in the Lakes with trainers, and quickly swapped to proper boots because the difference was absolutely obvious.

I bought my first pair at the original Hawkshead shop in Hawkshead and they did me well for a decade (they don't make them any more <sob> they were so good).

Currently sitting in a field waiting to meet my Gold DofE kids up a hill. On Bronze, we have allowed some students to wear trail shoes because where we do Bronze is very flat and we cover a lot of diamond paths. Silver, the terrain is a bit harder and we do insist on boots, mostly to protect ankles from sprains. Ultimately it is going to be down to your group leader, but we wouldn't allow someone in street trainers to do it.

You do all know that walking boots are no longer the hefty, stiff-soled foot armour of yesteryear, right? A lot of them are more structured trainers with ankle cuffs, and they all have shaped, bouncy soles now.

For bronze we were told they could wear trainers, but on the practice it rained the whole weekend and dd got terrible blisters because her feet were wet the whole time. I would suggest at minimum they are waterproof, buying walking boots was the best decision, she has now completed her bronze, silver and gold without any issues.

This. You need the ankle support.

Years ago we went walking with a group of friends - all wearing boots bar one. It really wasn't the most challenging terrain we were in, just descending a grassy slope. Nevertheless the woman without boots slipped and fell over and broke her ankle badly. DH and a friend had to run down the valley to call for help (this was before mobile phones) and the mountain rescue had to come out for her. I wouldn't risk it.

well, it’s surely obvious that borrowed boots would be a terrible idea!!! They wouldn’t fit properly which is why you got blisters!! Honestly - so your poor experience decades ago because some idiot thought giving you someone else’s boots was ok, means your kid can’t have proper correct footwear now? Ridiculous!!

Proper fitted walking boots, correctly broken in, with decent socks will give him much better support and protection than trainers.

One of the most common hillwalking injuries is a twisted ankle and proper boots will help stop this.

they will also be much more waterproof. I can ford streams in mine, would never try that in trainers!

the kids with blisters last time likely bought brand new boots and didn’t break them in.

We had our kit inspected and I would have been turned away or given the option of wearing ‘communal walking boots’.

There’s no way I’d have wanted to do some of the climbing without the ankle support that you get from proper walking boots. I wore my Dad’s and they were worn in. I think that prevented blistering.

I would still be very nervous about trainers getting wet and staying wet. It isn’t all about the weather. They’ll come to streams and other water features and sometimes you have to walk in very shallow water.

Family of fell runners here. I had to buy a pair of boots for my child’s d of e as school INSISTED. No fell runners would ever wear boots. Trip up in boots and you are on the floor. Trip up in trainers and you go over your ankle but 99% of the time are perfectly able to walk on. Those boots are now gathering dust having been worn once. Need to take them to a charity shop. What a waste of money.

I’ve always found trainers (even cheap supermarket ones) way more comfortable than walking boots.

I do lots of walking including places like snowdon, all in trainers.
And I too, would want to wear trainers to do this over walking boots.

Walking boots are recommended and so I wouldn’t like to say not to wear them because that’s what they’re designed for.
They’re much more supportive and waterproof.

The biggest issue with the trainers is if they get wet and then they will rub too.

I would speak to the organisers and find out the rules first.

Then I would look into getting him some and wearing them round for a few weeks to get used to them and then take his trainers in his bag.