Originally Posted By balzaccom
I think you folks missed the point of the original article. In each case, the article took what has sometimes been considered "gospel" and suggested that there are other ways that are at least as good and maybe better. It didn't say that you HAD to hike in shoes...it said that you don't HAVE to hike in boots.


Don't misunderstand me balzaccom, I'm not trying to contradict the article, just throw in one nuance and add to the discussion. Incidentally, I'm not about to trade in my shoes for the weight (and expense) of boots any time soon, but I don't care if someone chooses otherwise. I know Gershon is a big fan of his boots, and they seem to work really well for him.
_________________________
The journey is more important than the destination.