Connecticut Coastal Kayaking - memories of CONNYAK and MASK trips

Thimble Islands (2010)

Mystic CT (2006)

Around the time I started sea kayaking in the early-90s, I encountered few other paddlers on the water in the western end of Long Island Sound. Plenty of motor and sail boaters, but few (if any) other paddlers. To find other sea kayakers, for reasons of camaraderie and safety, I combed through the advert sections of magazines (ACK, Sea Kayaker), checked brochures at local paddling shops, and inquired of folks I encountered during kayak instruction classes, pool sessions, etc. I quickly became aware of the two principal sea kayaking clubs in my region -  MASK (the Metropolitan Association of Sea Kayakers) and CONNYAK (Connecticut Sea Kayakers). Yes, there were other paddling clubs in the area (Sebago Canoe Club in Queens, Touring Kayak Club on City Island, and Long Island Paddlers may have been around then) but these other clubs were either more locally-focused or had membership requirements as a condition of joining trips.  By contrast, MASK and ConnYak were open to all and advertised paddling trips further afield throughout Connecticut and New York so were just what I was looking for.

The mid-90's being pre-internet days, I relied on monthly (or quarterly) paper newsletters from MASK and ConnYak sent via snail-mail.  These newsletters typically included short articles on paddling and most critically their list of upcoming paddling trips. Trip calendars had to be published and mailed months in advance – so we all waited for these newsletters with great eagerness.

MASK: I only attended a few MASK paddles and perhaps one or two club meetings which were fun events that sometimes included guest speakers.  I remember “Captain Al” Ysaguirre being a lead organizing figure and the club having a strong Greenland paddling bent. Although very active for years, I believe MASK is now inactive, hopefully it will come back to life (formerly at www.seacanoe.org).

CONNYAK: Regarding ConnYak, I paddled with them a lot over the years.  Am not sure how I initially hooked up with ConnYak – could have been through Norwalk’s Small Boat Shop (another hugely prominent force in the local sea kayak scene, now closed, RIP) or from people I met at rolling sessions I attended early on with AMC’s whitewater paddling chapter at the YMCA pool in Stamford, CT.  ConnYak was, and remains, a fantastic resource for paddlers eager to explore the varied habitats and conditions of coastal Connecticut.  One thing I will say is that the membership of ConnYak, and therefore the location of most trips, was (is) mostly comprised of individuals from central and eastern Connecticut. So as a Westchester County paddler I was a bit of an anomaly.  I had to do a lot of driving East - which was fine, I paddled the western end of the Sound on my own all the time so enthusiastically looked eastwards for variety.  Later, in the 2000’s, I hooked up with a rough water "subgroup" of ConnYak who focused on paddling out of Stonington CT, around Napatree Point and the Fishers Island tide races - places I became very familiar with while paddling with Atlantic Kayak Tours (AKT) in the early 2000's.

Connyak’s a great, open resource – their website has replaced newsletters and they’ve put all their launch sites on the web – an excellent resource: CONNYAK Launch Sites

Atlantic Kayak Tours

For in-depth sea kayak training in the NY Metro Area, the only real game in town back when I started paddling in the 90's was Atlantic Kayak Tours run by husband and wife team Bill and Janice Lozano.  Bill was an early convert to the BCU system, the only 5 Star Paddler in the area at that time, and BCU’s North American Administrator for many years.  During much of the time I paddled with AKT, Janice was leading many (if not most) of the trips and handled the day to day business while Bill focused on setting up their Paddle Sports Center at Annsville Creek (Peekskill NY).   To this day, Bill and Janice have a unique passion for the sport and love sharing their passion with others.  This business of theirs, that they've run for more than 30 years, and their infectious enthusiasm for the sport have been huge gifts to so many sea kayakers.

So when I started paddling more seriously, AKT was THE PLACE to learn. I had done a lot of paddling on my own initially, with instruction from many different places and instructors.  Later, some years into the sport, I got serious about learning the best way to do things. And indeed had to "unlearn" some things as well. With the help of AKT, I was able to really develop my skills and eventually got my 4 Star Sea and Coach 2T awards. Around 2004 (?) Bill asked me to join the AKT staff to help lead trips and as a sea kayak coach. Although I was only able to be an active staff member there for maybe 5-6 years, it was the highlight of my time sea kayaking.  It’s impossible to overstate how important teaching others and being responsible for the happiness and safety of paying customers is in rapidly improving one’s own paddling knowledge and leadership skills.  When one has to teach how to properly execute strokes hundreds of times and when things like rescues and towing happen often out of necessity, not as part of an exercise, you can pack tons of valuable sea kayaking experience into a short amount of time.

I always remember my days paddling with AKT fondly. Their emphasis on core paddling skills and having FUN on the water really sets them apart. And the central personalities of Bill and Janice have added greatly to the success of their business, and I think to the popularity and development of sea kayaking in the NY Metro region.

Check out their "expert center" for superior tips on paddling skills, boat maintenance, etc.: AKT Expert Center

A few photos:

Crew ready to head out - North Fork Long Island!

Bill at Brigantine, NJ

Hudson Highlands w/ Becky

Chuck and Jim -  instruction class on Hudson

What to do with the Knees? Alternative Sea Kayak Cockpit Designs

Ah, the perpetual debate.  Every sea kayaker will have an opinion and a preference about this, and that preference may change over time.  I was happy with an “ocean” cockpit for many years, moved from looser-fitting boats to tighter fitting ones, then back again.  My thoughts on four general categories of cockpit design below.

1. Knees under in the Middle (Ocean, Greenland)
2. Knees under out to the Side (Standard Keyhole)
3. Open or Exposed (Epic, West Coast)
4. Knees under but High (Keyhole Compromise)

1. Knees under in the Middle (Greenland or Ocean Cockpit)

Pros: boat control in rough water; potential for improved forward paddling form 
Cons: increased effort during entry/exit

Traditional Greenland sea kayaks intended for open water use typically had small, round cockpits to keep the water out and to facilitate the attachment of a seal skin spray skirt or Tuilik.  The first British fiberglass kayaks copied this traditional or “ocean cockpit” design.  It’s a cockpit style that has fallen out of fashion in recent years. The ocean cockpit allows placement of the knees anywhere along the underside of the deck and is often paired with a knee tube or centrally-placed foam block glued under the deck to allow contact points for your knees for boat control.  I used a fairly roomy ocean cockpit on a VCP Pintail kayak exclusively for many years and preferred it over keyhole cockpits for these reasons – more comfort, better forward paddling ergonomics with legs out straight (not bent Indian-style), and excellent boat control with the knees gripping the central foam block.  The downside is the extra struggle to get in and out of an ocean cockpit, which requires shimmying in from the back deck while bracing with the paddle at the shoreline. Not an insignificant annoyance but one that's acceptable to many.

Even smaller ocean cockpits with lower decks are common on today's Greenland-inspired kayaks, whether skin-on-frame, wood, or fiberglass. These  allow for an even lower knee position which can reduce the up-down movement of the legs and so can limit torso rotation during forward paddling.  But as anyone who paddles a Greenland boat will tell you, their low decks provide superior contact points for boat control.  One school of thought is that the Inuit did not employ much torso rotation during forward paddling, but instead relied on low strokes and “breaking the box” arm movements, meaning bending the elbows more (i.e. the paddle shaft does not remain in-line with the shoulders as much during the forward stroke as compared to the European-style forward stroke). When paired with a Greenland paddle, this less dynamic way of forward paddling may be easier on the spine over the long haul and makes sense when one considers that native peoples needed to maintain a life’s time of paddling to survive.

2. Knees under out to the Side (Standard Keyhole)

Pros: boat control in rough water; speed/safety when existing during rough water landings
Cons: may restrict forward paddling form and forces

Sea kayaks began borrowing the keyhole cockpit designs first introduced in whitewater boats, which provide firm and typically low grip areas for the thighs. Edging the kayak and C-to-C rolling with such a setup is fantastic due to the leverage provided by having the knees out to the side “Indian-style”.  Another advantage to the keyhole design is the ability to get the legs out of the boat quickly at the shoreline, providing an added measure of safety during exposed landings.

The problem with the standard keyhole cockpit comes in the forward paddling department. Kayak manufacturers play around with the height of the cockpit coaming’s thigh braces or “thigh hooks”.  Setting them low provides a tight fit and immediate response, while setting them higher allows room to pump the legs a little bit when forward paddling. But either way, with the standard keyhole cockpit’s Indian-style knee position the “line of force” from your hips down the legs to the feet is not a straight line. As compared to ocean cockpit or open cockpit boats (discussed below), the angled leg position necessitated by the keyhole cockpit design reduces the effectiveness of torso rotation and the transfer of force from your body to the footpegs/footplate during the forward stroke.  But for most rough-water sea kayakers, the keyhole cockpit is a reasonable trade-off that creates a boat that is just as maneuverable (controllable) as an ocean cockpit-equipped boat with the added benefit that one can easily get in and out of it without a lot of gymnastics.

3. Open or Exposed (Epic, West Coast)

Pros: improved forward paddling, freedom of movement
Cons: boat control in rough water

American-style (i.e. West Coast) kayaks were initially made with bigger cockpits for use in protected waters. Sitting in such a kayak, the knees can be kept together in the center and up above the cockpit rim while paddling but, when necessary, the knees can be tucked under the sides of the cockpit to edge and control the boat.  This cockpit style does not provide substantial thigh hooks so lacks the positive leg-to-deck contact points found in the keyhole cockpit shape.  But these boats do gain one key advantage - with the wider cockpit opening they can be paddled in a knees-up position similar to surf skis or to K1 racing boats. Some even come with a central foot plate so that the feet can be kept together rather than out to the sides on footpegs.  These elements are of great benefit when forwarding padding. Epic's sea kayaks (inspired by surf skis) fall into this category as do older designs such as the Necky Arluk/Tesla, the Current Designs Solstice, and others – there were many kayaks with open cockpits in the early ‘90’s when I started sea kayaking.  However, boat control in rough water is a little tricky with this cockpit design, relying more on shifting weight and support strokes with the paddle since the knee-to-deck contacts are not immediately available for lateral adjustments (roll trim).

If you don’t paddle frequently in bumpy water, then the open cockpit design has many advantages.

4. Knees under but High (Keyhole Compromise)

Pros: knees up for improved forward paddling; boat control in rough water
Cons: ?windage?

With the goal of improving upon the keyhole cockpit, designers at Rockpool and Tiderace (and possibly other companies) have added a 3-dimensional quality to the coaming with thigh hooks (thigh grips) that dip down into the cockpit opening to allow for a higher, more centered knee position while retaining the keyhole’s other advantages.  I’ve paddled a bunch of kayaks with this design and I can say without reservation that this design is an improvement for most people.  The key features are the more vertical (up/down) surface provided by the thigh hooks, the placement of the thigh hooks closer together to reduce the angle of the paddler's legs, and the greater height at the front of the coaming. This design puts the legs more in-line with the feet (the knees are less splayed out) which allows some additional up-down leg movement and torso rotation. Not as good for forward paddling as a surf ski or open cockpit, but better than the old-style "locked in" keyhole shape. So in a sense, this cockpit design is a "compromise" between the standard keyhole and the more centered-knee position allowed by the open cockpit.  Another advantage I’ve noted in these designs is that the thigh hooks are just an extension of the coaming, the kayak’s deck is not part of thigh hooks.  This allows the cockpit opening to have a continuously round, elliptical shape so that the spray skirt rand fits snug and as a consequence the cockpit can be more water tight than with Standard Keyhole shapes.

As far as “cons” to this cockpit design, if the front deck height is taken to extremes (as in the Rockpool Alaw kayak), this design may add windage and get in the way of low sweep strokes. Also, the front part of the cockpit is a bit narrower with this cockpit type which may hamper a wet exit slightly.  Neither problem a big deal in practice as far as I'm concerned.

Ratios of Bow Length to Stern Length - Kayaks

At the risk of spreading misinformation – this might be of interest to some, see tables below.  Been talking to a friend about various boat options he’s considering buying. So, I made these very approximate measurements simply using plan-view photographs available online to help that discussion. They show the ratio of bow length to stern length for select SKUK and Tiderace kayaks. The numbers mean nothing in themselves (I measured in centimeters with a ruler on the computer screen) – but assuming the photos were all well-centered when taken and assuming my measurements are fairly accurate (two big “if’s”), I think the bow/stern length ratios say something about the behavior of these boats.  The bigger ratios have more length in front of the cockpit as compared to behind the cockpit, whereas the smaller ratios are more balanced fore and aft.

So for example, the Romany is at the higher end of the bow-to-stern ratio with a 1.64 and behaves that way – its comparatively short stern is very maneuverable when planing on a wave and the boat remains straight-running in following seas, resists broaching more than some. But when paddled forward aggressively on flat water its short stern (and therefore lack of volume behind the cockpit) can cause the kayak to “sink” in the rear, especially with a heavier paddler (like me at my 185 lbs former weight).  At the opposite end of the scale, the Explorer and Latitude are more balanced fore-and-aft, coming in at the lower end of bow/stern ratios – 1.50 and 1.41.  Having owned an Explorer, this makes sense – it glides better, resists “sitting” in the stern and is good for distance paddling. 

This “method” can’t be used across kayak manufactures – I think it only says something when comparing boats of very similar hull design.  The SKUK hulls are all “variations on a theme” with roughly similar distribution of volume, rocker, etc.   Comparing these ratios for SKUK boats against ratios for Epic kayaks, for example, would be meaningless as these boats have strikingly different shapes. Most significantly, the Epic hulls are based on surf skis and so are strongly swede-form, so can have very high hull volume behind the cockpit despite having a comparatively short stern.

I did the same thing for some Tiderace boats I’ve paddled – separate table below.  It too supports my impressions of these kayaks.  The Xtra is designed for playing in rough water and sure enough has a comparatively high bow/stern length ratio of 1.58. Whereas the touring purpose of the Xplore has a lower ratio of 1.36.

Just something to think about.