*

[nomad]

*

[birdseye]

Excellent report. I actually forgot I was at work for a while.

Thanks.

[JohnHuth]

This is great - I've been contemplating that crossing - perhaps next year, and I've been wondering about the effect of the current there. Thanks for relating it.

Also - I can relate on the bluefish end of things - I always find landing those buggers to be a bit of a challenge. The hardest part is figuring out how to get the hook out of their mouth in a pitching kayak and still keep your fingers!

J

[Bolonsky Adam]

For what it's worth, I'm Pisces, and for what it's worth, too, many probably already know that Nomad is simply Mark Stephens, a certain broad-shouldered guy from down near the south shore.

A lot of factors contributed to the success of our trip, not the least of which was the excitement of paddling to a faraway location over warm, fast-moving water that buckles and bends and swirls around mysterious-looking shallows. Those shallows, while all well-charted, are nonetheless spooky to encounter when six or seven miles, or more, from the main shore. They lend a peculiar yellow cast to the water which the water's seasonal fish, both blues and stripers, pick up. Those were the palest fish I have seen, almost ghostly in their silverness. It's been a while since I've been truly excited by the idea of paddling the waters of Massachustts, and this trip did a lot to re-kindle my slumbering enthusiasm for vast waters close to home.

For those of you who don't know, the two Sound's waters run in a bifurcated plume. Picture a drain pipe shaped exactly like a "Y", with Muskeget Channel, off the Vinevard's Wasque Point, as the vertical shaft of the pipe. The crotch of the"Y" is near Cape Poge, by a marked shoal. The tides run down the antlers of the Y, both coming and going, and gain velocity in the stem. They move FAST. I've fished Duxbury Bay lots on the tide, riding the Bay's fast streams from flat to flat, in both darkness and fog, while looking for fish. What has always mitigated the threat there for me has been the bay's endpoints: marshes and a tidal river at the west and north ends, the Cowyard and the distinctive grasses of the Cowyard and the Bug Light area. Disconcerting there, to me, has been somwehat how many eddies and backspins the currents there form, but there has always been those benign endpoints to consider. Paddle there enough times and most will fling one's kayak into that bay with the same confidence that you might pick up your cat and stand it on its head. You know you can do pretty much whatever you want.

Neither Vineyard nor Nantucket Sounds struck me that way, mostly for their vastness, also for their deep fogs, secondarily for their ferry traffic, and most viscerally for my not knowing what to expect. Had I known our trips flash points by way of experience rather than chart-and-tables inference I might have been less nervous about the trip. But as Mark told me while we were discussing the trip, if the idea of it didn't make me nervous I probably wouldn't have wanted to do it.

The bifurcating tidal flumes were amazing not only in their complexity but also in their power, constancy, and well-worn vectors. When we needed southeastern aid, a long and sustained push, we in spades got it. So too the speed we needed when running northwestward. If you take a long look at Eldridge's chart tables, those which reference Pollock Rip, and the chart maps which follow, you can see both why we had such an amazing first two-and-a-half legs of this trip, and why, for both going out and coming back, the last two and six miles, respectively, were such ass-kickers. Steep groundswell off Cape Ann aside, op\r the clapitois off Mistake Island of Maine's Jonesport, these were some of the roughest waters I have ever been in , if only for their abrupt and choatic steepness. Otherwise the waters were quite pacific --- the initial 15 miles such a cakewalk I started giving Mark crap for taking us on such a wimpy trip.

Muskeget is lonely, desolate, and forbidding all at once. It is also untrammelled and uninhabited and as mysterious as Monomoy, only more threateing around the perimeter. I wouldn't camp there again, nor recomend it, as not only is there no real cover from the heaviest weather there but also there's neither fresh water nor an easy way off should you get pinned there.

I wouldn't have wanted to do this trip without Mark's vast reservoir of knowledge of the dynamics of Nantucket and Vineyard Sounds and his uncannily adept and quick apprehension of how Eldridges' data and diagrams relate to making a three-day, two night trip to not only Muskeget but Tuckernuck. As for Eldridge, it's reliable to all degrees for the prudent mariner, but not entirely for the kayaker. Eldrige did nothing to account for the hells that exist off northwestern end of

Tuckernuck and for what surely too boils between Tuckernuck's eastern end and the furthest reaches of Madaket. The water is simply too shallow there for anything but a kayak, and I had the distinct feeling that, given a blown roll and the need for a T-resucue and a pump out near the former we would have had a dicey situation on our hands. The tidal current there accellerates in a way Eldrige had no need to document. Cripes, the only reason why the fishing was so good in that area (even if it was terrific everywhere we dropped a hook) was because the damn fish got trapped in a swirling eddy they could not escape. Picture dogs chasing cats in a drained circular pool and you get the picture.

One last note. For complex domestic reasons (read worried girlfriend) I had to contact the Coast Guard for a couple of minutes Monday evening. I don't know which antenna the watchstander at station Woods Hole was using (they coordinate SAR for the area), but Mark's incredibly inexpensive Cobra VHF (two for $80) gave me crystal clear communications over a distance of fifteen-plus miles ---- all with the mere 14 feet of elevation I was able to reach by picking my way carefully up to the top of one of Muskeget's tightly grass-woven dunes.

Thanks, Mark, for a great trip! You were the plans and ops officer, me the official worrier and what-ifer!

[markstephens]

Oh, damn, you blew my cover, the mystery is gone...

Thanks for the unwarranted high praise. But you forgot to mention that I kicked your butt in the fishing category.

[JohnHuth]

OK, a few questions (I feel like Colombo):

On my chart, I see a red nun, marked "4", but it's only about a mile and a half east of Vineyard, not really halfway. Was that the buoy, or was there another? There's one much further south, marked "2", but you'd have to do a course change, and I think the currents are hairier in that area.

What was the date of your departure from the Vineyard? I was trying to figure out what the relative currents were as a function of the time you were out there, but needed a starting point.

Naively, I would've timed it so that I was approaching Muskeget when it was locally close to slack just before ebb, which would be about an hour after ebb starts at Pollack Rip. The milder flood current on the rest of the crossing would've been going with the wind and pushing you a bit into the sound, and then you would've have mild conditions at Muskeget.

Also, I see in the bathymetric charts that there's a local kind of "funnel" about a mile west of Muskeget that would locally amplify an ebb in that area.(channel looks like about 30 ft. deep, with 4 ft on either side - funneling down from the NE) I might have been tempted, once I actually saw Muskeget visually, to sweep wide and approach Muskeget from the north, giving this channel a kind of wide berth - especially on a healthy ebb with a SW wind - that would've been pretty choppy!

Isn't it spelled "Pisces", not "Picses"?

Finally - you guys seem to have done a few adventurous trips. Have either of you done the Monomoy -> Nantucket crossing or know about it?

Thanks a bunch!

John H.

[markstephens]

Hmmm, seems that all Nomad's trip reports get scrutinized by the navigation nudges.

On my chart, I see a red nun, marked "4", but it's only about a mile and a half east of Vineyard, not really halfway. Was that the buoy, or was there another?

That is the one, but we marked it when it was at 250 degrees relative to our course from Cape Poge, which was the four-mile point of our crossing.

What was the date of your departure from the Vineyard?

We didn't leave from the Vineyard, we left from Falmouth. This past Monday.

Naively, I would've timed it so that I was approaching Muskeget when it was locally close to slack just before ebb, which would be about an hour after ebb starts at Pollack Rip. The milder flood current on the rest of the crossing would've been going with the wind and pushing you a bit into the sound, and then you would've have mild conditions at Muskeget.

First of all, we never saw mild conditions at Muskeget. But we had a six-hour paddle to Muskeget, so it wasn't so simple as planning to get there at relative slack. That would have meant starting our nine-mile crossing on a southeast course during the maximum northerly flood in the Muskeget Channel. We wanted as little current as possible for this crossing, not really knowing what to expect with all the shoals out there. It would also have meant bucking the ebb current in Vineyard Sound at the beginning of the trip. It was one of those situations where you just couldn't have it all go your way the whole way.

Also, I see in the bathymetric charts that there's a local kind of "funnel" about a mile west of Muskeget that would locally amplify an ebb in that area.(channel looks like about 30 ft. deep, with 4 ft on either side - funneling down from the NE) I might have been tempted, once I actually saw Muskeget visually, to sweep wide and approach Muskeget from the north, giving this channel a kind of wide berth - especially on a healthy ebb with a SW wind - that would've been pretty choppy!

Look again, John. That's not really a funnel as it has no outlet. It's just an area of deeper water that doesn't really affect the tidal flows around there. The ebb runs northwest there, along the north side of Muskeget. Right into our track coming at the island from the northwest. We originally planned to hit the island on the north side, but when we ran into this current, we tried to swing south and hoped the island would shield us from it. It didn't because the current also runs on the south side of it, in a WNW direction. The current diagrams in Eldridge are not reliable this close in to the islands. The current directions shown in Eldridge are gross generalizations. We originally thought based on Eldridge that we would be crossing a beam current in that area that would be flowing southwest. NOT!

Isn't it spelled "Pisces", not "Picses"?

Yyyesss... and as far as I can see it was spelled correctly throughout the report.

Finally - you guys seem to have done a few adventurous trips. Have either of you done the Monomoy -> Nantucket crossing or know about it?

We've looked at it. The actual crossing doesn't look too bad (long) but once you hit Great Point, then what.

[bob budd]

>

>Yyyesss... and as far as I can see it was spelled correctly

>throughout the report.

It may be that you have been surreptitiously outed (to the previously uninformed).

Instead I read and forgot that Adam had done so previously. Must have been the NasalCrom.

[jason]

it seems that a lot of history is being removed. :-(

Care to give a hint on why?

Thanks -Jason

[Brian Nystrom]

Big Brother is watching you! ;-)

[markstephens]

No, nothing like that. Some of these stories may appear in print publications and just need to be sure there are no copyright issues.

[bob budd]

Since its come up I am curious why it matters once the material has been publicly disclosed. If this was a patent matter, the disclosure of the material to be patented in any public forum makes its patent invalid.

Let's see Dr. Casey answer that one...

[birdseye]

If the articles are no longer here then maybe someone can tell us where we can find them in print. These were good articles and occasionally worth another read (especially for those of us who don't get out in the winter and need something to read). I've also referred people to them and might want to do it again in the future. Mark, any possibility you could email me a copy of them. Nelson

[jason]

>Since its come up I am curious why it matters once the

>material has been publicly disclosed. If this was a patent

>matter, the disclosure of the material to be patented in any

>public forum makes its patent invalid.

>

>Let's see Dr. Casey answer that one...

Bob are you thinking of trade secrets? As once trade secrets are discussed in public they are no longer secrets.

Patents and patent applications are entered into public record.

This allows us to see the crazy items that people attempt to patent such as this:

http://www.cellular-news.com/story/15792.php

or another classic application would be this one:

http://patentlaw.typepad.com/patent/2006/0...equests_mo.html

-Jason

[Nick Schade]

> Some of these stories may appear in

>print publications and just need to be sure there are no

>copyright issues.

Deleting material from this site will do nothing to change the copyright issues. The moment they are published anywhere copyright rules come into play. Whoever wrote the article owns the rights to the material. It can not be published any where else without their permission.

Deleting only makes it so people who want to read it will now have to figure out where it is being published and pay for it. This is good for the new publisher, but does not change the copyright status in any way. It is not a copyright issue, but profit issue. A magazine may prefer that their articles not appear anywhere else so they can charge for the information, but not because of copyright reasons. The author still owns the copyright and may print it elsewhere if he wants.

I must say I find it to be very poor form to delete messages just so someone can make a profit from it. If you think you want to publish information somewhere else at some time and won't want it here, don't put it here in the first place. Once you put it here learn to live with that choice. The fact that many people like to delete messages significantly reduces the usefulness of this message board.

BTW to read old articles that may have been deleted, you can often go to http://web.archive.org/ Looking at http://web.archive.org/web/20050206033431/...rum/dcboard.cgi you can find message from a year ago.

[Brian Nystrom]

Deleting this material was pointless and has done nothing but cause confusion. I suggest you put it back.

When I recently wrote an article on gelcoat repair for publication, it was an expansion on material that I already had - and still have - on the web. No one cared a bit about that. I have another article submitted that is an expansion of a trip report I wrote a couple of years ago. I have a book coming out shortly that's an expansion/compilation of a lot of things I've written on the subject it deals with. There are no copyright issues with any of this.

[markstephens]

Nick: WTF? I hadn't noticed you having any problem with using club message boards to try to make a buck off kayaking. You don't seem to think using forums like this for free advertising is "bad form". You're a hypocrite.

I don't owe this forum anything. If I choose to remove material that I put significant effort into developing and sharing here, for free, that's my business. If people want to make a stink over it, then I won't bother to in future.

[jason]

Mark I for one very much appreciate the stories that you post on the message board. Every time I read about one of your great adventures I think that I would like to do that one day.

So please keep posting even if they are up for a couple of days. We will just have to read fast.

Thanks -Jason

[Brian Nystrom]

Don't you think you're overreacting a bit?

Where has he posted anything here that could be construed as "free advertizing" or that would "make a buck" as you imply? I've never seen him post anything like that, even on the Commercial forum where it's allowed. Even on his own forums - which are widely considered to be the best resources on the web for kayak building information and which HE pays for - he rarely self-promotes. When was the last time you saw Nick say "Buy my book" or "Buy my plans" or even put his business name in his signature? I can't think of a single instance. You're really barking up the wrong tree here.

He's trying to explain to you that there are no copyright issues with having material on the web and selling similar material to magazines. Considering that he's an author and boat designer and has to deal with copyright issues for a living, he should know what he's talking about. The fact that you've posted something here in no way precludes you from selling that information to someone who wants to publish and distribute it. I would think that's something you'd want to know.

He's also pointing out that the utility in forums is often in their continuity and and perpetual nature. Hacking up a thread ruins that, which is why he doesn't allow editing or deletions on his forums. While I find it frustrating that I can't correct typos either, it's good to know that information will always be there if I need to research something.

Take a deep breath and relax; no one is attacking you. Nick was just making some general points about the nature of forums and writing.

[markstephens]

http://www.nspn.org/htdocs/dcforum/DCForumID6/400.html

http://www.nspn.org/htdocs/dcforum/DCForumID6/383.html

[bob budd]

Yes, Nick has appropriately used the board in the past.

Some people think its bad form to remove postings. For one it breaks up the continuity of the thread for future users. Doesn't seem like there's much to dispute here. As for "bad form", that's definitely in the eye of the beholder and we should respect the opinion even if we disagree with it.

The reason stated for removing the postings appears to be flawed. However, if one is writing for a employer that insists that one remove such postings or if the writer otherwise chooses to remove it later it would be within their rights. Each of us has our own interpretations of message board etiquette and we should also respect that.

As for copyright issues removing the posting has nothing whatsoever to do with copyright issues. In copyrights the originator retains all "copy" rights unless they explicitly surrender them.

[Nick Schade]

>Nick: WTF? I hadn't noticed you having any problem with

>using club message boards to try to make a buck off

>kayaking. You don't seem to think using forums like this for

>free advertising is "bad form". You're a hypocrite.

>

>I don't owe this forum anything. If I choose to remove

>material that I put significant effort into developing and

>sharing here, for free, that's my business. If people want

>to make a stink over it, then I won't bother to in future.

I'm sorry you took offense. Perhaps I was too harsh. I could go back and edit my earlier post to eliminate the context for your reply, thus making your insults appear more gratuitous than they already are, however I'll stand by what I said. I don't think it serves for a civil discussion to pretend I said anything different.

I do serve a commercial purpose with some of my posts, however I think I make it clear when I am doing so. I also have put a lot of effort into posting information online. I have never felt that this in anyway interfered with my other efforts at publication. Much of the material that I have published elsewhere is available online in various forms and a substantial amount of my material that is currently online I will probably want to reuse in other forms in the future. There is no copyright conflict in doing this.

You have every right to do whatever you want to with your own information. You reserve all the rights unless you explicitly give them up. But removing a previous post or changing the content removes the context for people reading the replies to that post. This reduces the value of the message board. You aren't obligated to maintain the value of this message board, but its value to you and everyone else is dependent on the cooperation of all the users.

What was going on a red nun #4 that generated a discussion elsewhere in this thread? Is it something I would like to know if I head out that way? I don't know because the context is gone. By deleting your message the effort other people took to ask questions about it has lost its value. I think that is too bad.

[Brian Nystrom]

...which is open to any person or business who wants to post there. We actively encourage people to do so. How can you possibly construe them as somehow taking advantage of the forum? They are entirely appropriate.