Question about boots on Silver Cloud

[RobC1116]

For those who have been on an expedition cruise to Antarctica or the Arctic on the "new" Silver Cloud, what is the situation with the waterproof boots? When we went to Antarctica on the Fram a couple of years ago, there were plenty of boots in all sizes to borrow. Is that the case on the Cloud, or is it necessary to buy or rent boots? If the latter, we are planning to rent them and have them waiting for us on board. But what if you don't exactly know which size will fit? It appears that one should rent one size larger than one's normal shoe size, but is this the case? What happens if you rent them and then they don't fit? Thanks for any information!

[Carol From California]

1 hour ago, RobC1116 said:

For those who have been on an expedition cruise to Antarctica or the Arctic on the "new" Silver Cloud, what is the situation with the waterproof boots? When we went to Antarctica on the Fram a couple of years ago, there were plenty of boots in all sizes to borrow. Is that the case on the Cloud, or is it necessary to buy or rent boots? If the latter, we are planning to rent them and have them waiting for us on board. But what if you don't exactly know which size will fit? It appears that one should rent one size larger than one's normal shoe size, but is this the case? What happens if you rent them and then they don't fit? Thanks for any information!

We were on the Cloud in February (Antarctica).  The boots are not free.  You can either bring your own or you can rent them.  You reserve your size before you go.  When you get onboard if they don't fit properly they have loads of spare boots so you can exchange them for your size. We purchased ours ahead of time.

[FauxNom]

In September there seemed to be lots of boots available to borrow. Maybe that's because so many people rent them, but my husband had no trouble getting some from the ship's supply.  Of course there is no guarantee they will have your size, but odds are in your favor if you're willing to gamble.

[carefreecruise]

Just wonder....

If you can't use the slip-on type boots and need to bring lace up type. How high do they need to be for wet landings? 6", 8" or 12"?  I have a very nice 8" snow boots I would like to bring... 

[Stumblefoot]

2 hours ago, carefreecruise said:

I have a very nice 8" snow boots I would like to bring... 

Us too.  I would much prefer to use my own Sorels.

[cflutist]

Should be 12 - 15 inches per the documentation we just received from Silversea for our December cruise. We bought ours from Bogs.

Edited October 25, 2018 by cflutist

[57 varieties]

You will be stepping off into the sea.  Boots need to be knee high and laces won’t work as you will have wet feet.

[FauxNom]

In the Arctic, we had only one landing where I felt like the water might reach the top of my boots. If you have space to pack your lace-up boots, I'd take those along for hiking and then hope to borrow a pair of the knee-highs from the ship. Then you could use the ship's boots for the very wet landings, and your own for when you want comfort. (Of course there's no guarantee the ship will have the right boots for you, so YMMV)

[RachelG]

We have always found boots to fit onboard Explorer and have never rented.  I think they want you to rent them to make money.

[Stumblefoot]

19 hours ago, RachelG said:

We have always found boots to fit onboard Explorer and have never rented.  I think they want you to rent them to make money.

Stupid question as I'm not following "boots fit on board, but you don't rent them"; does this mean you buy them each voyage?  

[FauxNom]

Stumblefoot, we've been referring to the option to borrow boots for free once on board--that's why there's no guarantee of your preferred size. As I see it, the loaner boots are a courtesy to passengers but there's not a promise they will be there.

[Mocamps]

We're going on the first Antarctica cruise of the season - leaves on November 11th from Punta Arenas and ends in Ushuaia. Because of the different start and end points there were no boots available to hire. I spoke to Silverseas and they told me there ARE some boots onboard available to borrow but they can't guarantee sizes. So we're taking our own rather than risking it. We figured it wasn't worth spending all that money on the cruise of a lifetime and then it being ruined by not being able to go ashore. Our boots are insulated muck boots with vibram soles. My husbands are knee length but mine are only mid length. I have been assured by one of the Antarctic destination experts on Trip Advisor that mid length are fine but am thinking if it isn't there may be taller ones onboard which may suffice for any particularly wet landings. On Trip Advisor the general advice is that you can get away with normal Wellington boots and thick socks but not lace-up snow boots as water may get in and once your feet are cold and wet it's miserable.

 I 'm SO excited! Only 2 more sleeps before we leave for Santiago!!

[cflutist]

Well please report back.

 

We bought our boots because it was only a little more money than renting them.  Although I already had trekking poles,  I got some new ones that fold into thirds for easy packing. 

 

Although our 15-night Antarctica cruise is not till mid December,  I have already started packing.  

[Mocamps]

32 minutes ago, cflutist said:

Although our 15-night Antarctica cruise is not till mid December,  I have already started packing.  

 

 ......I've been packed for weeks!! But can't persuade my husband to start yet as he's a last minute person!! Just hope that all the stuff he wants to take is clean! 

[RobC1116]

Thank for all the replies! I guess some of my confusion now about hiking boots vs. waterproof knee-high muck boots is that the latter are required in Antarctica because of the possibility of environmental contamination. You have to sanitize the muck boots before getting off and when returning to the ship from landings in Antarctica. What is the situation in the Arctic? If the waterproof boots are not required for landings, I might bring my own hiking boots and take a chance on borrowing the muck boots when necessary.

[ruthnlarry]

31 minutes ago, RobC1116 said:

Thank for all the replies! I guess some of my confusion now about hiking boots vs. waterproof knee-high muck boots is that the latter are required in Antarctica because of the possibility of environmental contamination. You have to sanitize the muck boots before getting off and when returning to the ship from landings in Antarctica. What is the situation in the Arctic? If the waterproof boots are not required for landings, I might bring my own hiking boots and take a chance on borrowing the muck boots when necessary.

Why would one spend so much money on a Silversea expedition cruise, and then, take a chance of not being allowed to go ashore because one refused to rent or buy boots as specified in the precruise planning docs?  This makes no sense.

We are going on Silver Cloud in December, and have placed our order to rent boots.  We considered buying knee-high boots, but decided to rent because of the luggage weight restrictions on our Ushuaia flight.  We would not be very happy if our rented boots did not fit properly, and our size wasn't available because somebody had "borrowed" boots instead of renting them!

[carefreecruise]

Seems a little strange to get so worked up over boots. It seems you should be walking in something that is very comfortable and keeps your feet, warm and dry.  Lace-up 10" high snow boots are the answer for us. We have been on many wet landings and can only think of one in the Galapagos where the zodiac could only get within 25 feet of shore. Requiring 24" of deep water needing to be traversed. During most wet landings the first people off the zodiac are in the deepest water and susceptible to splashing. If you wait till the zodiac is mostly empty, they usually pull it more on shore, allowing you to not touch any water while getting off. A little jump is sometimes required... This way you can stay in your normal shoes, you are used too?  Maybe this is not the case in Antarctic, but would love to hear from ones that have done lots of wet landings in that area?  

Edited October 27, 2018 by carefreecruise

[BillK400]

We rented the boots for our 11/22/18 Antarctica cruise on the Silver Cloud. At $80 it would have possibly been smarter financially to purchase them, but we are from Atlanta and would never have further use for them and also would have the issue of the boots taking up considerable room in our luggage (will also be returning with the jacket provided by Silversea which also has to be factored in the luggage space requirements).

[jpalbny]

In polar landing sites, you very often have to make a few steps through ankle-high or slightly deeper water while wading ashore to a rocky beach. The zodiac will sometimes also get whacked by a wave which comes over the sides and splashes your pants pretty good. If that happens, the water will roll down your pants and then can get your feet wet - unless you're careful (see next paragraph).

 

Thus: muck boots (AKA gum boots) which come up a bit higher than mid-calf are the best option, I think. Sequence goes like this: long underwear tucked into socks. Pants over that, and pants are tucked into the boots. Then your waterproof rain pants go down over / outside the boots. That way if you get splashed, no water gets down your boots because the rain pants keep the water out, and your feet stay dry. Same if the water is near the top of the boots and a wave splashes you when walking ashore. A brief splash, even if it's over the top of the boots, will not get in.

 

The "hiking" is not ever a really long trek. IMO and IME, the extra waterproofing and security afforded by muck boots is far more important than whether they are comfortable hiking shoes. Unless things have changed drastically, you do not hike far enough to warrant needing dedicated hiking shoes, though I suppose if you have very sensitive feet or need special orthotics, that could be different. The guides do this trip every day for months at a time and if they tell us that this is the best way to do it, I figure that they probably know what they're talking about.

 

So from my description I hope it's clear why lace-up boots are less desirable than solid, slip-on muck boots. While I"m sure you could find a way to make high lace-up boots work in almost all circumstances, you are depending on them to be waterproof. The waterproof membrane coming up the front is thin and probably more prone to leaking than a solid rubber boot. If you're careful you will probably do OK. With my setup as above, I could probably fall over in the water and not get too wet (not that I tried, but...) 😄

[FauxNom]

RobC, in the Arctic, we never had to disinfect our boots. And there were lots of people who wore lace-ups, and lots of people who didn't leave them in the mudroom. But JP is correct--the Arctic hikes aren't particularly long. In my case though, for a few hours, or 2-3 miles, I really like a boot I know is comfortable.

 

RuthnLarry, I'm sure the fact that some people borrow boots will not affect your comfort in the least. It looked like they had lots of rentals for people who need to switch sizes (although I did hear one woman complain bitterly that she had to put her feet in boots sullied by another person having worn them). 

[carefreecruise]

2 hours ago, jpalbny said:

In polar landing sites, you very often have to make a few steps through ankle-high or slightly deeper water while wading ashore to a rocky beach. The zodiac will sometimes also get whacked by a wave which comes over the sides and splashes your pants pretty good. If that happens, the water will roll down your pants and then can get your feet wet - unless you're careful (see next paragraph).

 

Thus: muck boots (AKA gum boots) which come up a bit higher than mid-calf are the best option, I think. Sequence goes like this: long underwear tucked into socks. Pants over that, and pants are tucked into the boots. Then your waterproof rain pants go down over / outside the boots. That way if you get splashed, no water gets down your boots because the rain pants keep the water out, and your feet stay dry. Same if the water is near the top of the boots and a wave splashes you when walking ashore. A brief splash, even if it's over the top of the boots, will not get in.

 

The "hiking" is not ever a really long trek. IMO and IME, the extra waterproofing and security afforded by muck boots is far more important than whether they are comfortable hiking shoes. Unless things have changed drastically, you do not hike far enough to warrant needing dedicated hiking shoes, though I suppose if you have very sensitive feet or need special orthotics, that could be different. The guides do this trip every day for months at a time and if they tell us that this is the best way to do it, I figure that they probably know what they're talking about.

 

So from my description I hope it's clear why lace-up boots are less desirable than solid, slip-on muck boots. While I"m sure you could find a way to make high lace-up boots work in almost all circumstances, you are depending on them to be waterproof. The waterproof membrane coming up the front is thin and probably more prone to leaking than a solid rubber boot. If you're careful you will probably do OK. With my setup as above, I could probably fall over in the water and not get too wet (not that I tried, but...) 😄

Thanks JP.

I wish I could wear those type of boots. Amputee's can't bend the ankles on the prosthetic and it precludes them from slip-on boots. Looks like it will be the tried and proven; step into garbage bags, secured with rubber bands to take a few steps in the water. Then remove the garbage bags to a back pack. Sounds dumb but it's the only alternative... 

[Bill B]

A little trick from my commercial fishing days -

We always used 'Boot Bands' - essentially just a large, 1/2 inch-wide rubber band - on the outside of our rain gear to compress the pants against our boots... so if the water is higher than the top of the boot, it keeps the (vast majority) of water from 'coming up' and flooding the boot.

 

[Mocamps]

17 hours ago, ruthnlarry said:

We would not be very happy if our rented boots did not fit properly, and our size wasn't available because somebody had "borrowed" boots instead of renting them!

 

On our Silver Cloud cruise there isn't an option to rent them as we depart from Punta Arenas. The only options are bring our own or hope to borrow some in the right size. As you say, we're not going to risk the latter option!

 

My understanding from Silversea is that the loan boots (where correct sizes can't be guaranteed) belong to the ship (possibly left behind by other passengers?) whereas the hire boots (where correct sizes presumably ARE guaranteed for $80!) are from a commercial rental outlet who deliver to Ushuaia. So you don't need to worry about people getting your rental boots!