Eric Patterson submitted a new resource:
Guenther Garvey - Guenther Garvey from Mechanix Illustrated
Read more about this resource...
Guenther Garvey - Guenther Garvey from Mechanix Illustrated
Read more about this resource...
- Thread starter Eric Patterson
- Start date
I have wanted this plan for quite some time. We got it! Who is going to build it?
MLBob Furia
Well-known member
I want to know who is going for the record in "jumping mud flats" in it? Did you read the paragraph at the end of the write- up that says his personal record was 42 ' ?? 
I saw that. No way he stood upright clutching only the tiller and bow rope without getting thrown on impact. 
Richard Lathrop
Active member
Eric,
With the selection of plans on website someone could keep busy making all of these.
Rick
That would take a long time but it would be one heck of a Navy.
Steve Sanford
Well-known member
Good morning, All~I saw that. No way he stood upright clutching only the tiller and bow rope without getting thrown on impact.
Although Jersey will always be the capital of garveys - of all sizes and uses - we Long Islanders have long used the hull form for work and play. I never saw anyone jumping mud flats - but I have poled mine garvey-inspired gunning vessel across wet mud. Aside from Mr. Guenther somehow holding onto/staying within the boat during his mudflat leaps, I do wonder about the outboard. I'm pretty sure there were no longtail motors back in his day. And, I can tell you that navigating Long Island's gunning grounds entails lots of motoring across shoals. My 9.9 Johnson was never locked in the DOWN position - and popped up unexpectedly many when in unfamiliar waters on moon low tides...
Lots of duckboats were built garvey-style. Although, I must say I have not seen one in years and have no photos. of others' gunning garveys. Generally, their bows were a bit wider than Guenther's boat.
I designed my first gunning boat along the lines of a garvey (the first boat I owned was a 16-foot garvey for clamming) but gave it a bit of deadrise and a rounded nose. She was framed in Oak and Mahogany and sheathed with 1/4-inch marine plywood.
If I built this boat again, the fore and aft coamings would be crowned to follow the decks. The pipe oarlock stanchions were a common feature on Long Island gunning boats of all kinds.
Like a Sneakbox, I put a less-than 6-foot-long cockpit on the boat - and lay facing forward to hunt. I first made a stool rack for the stern - like a Sneakbox - but abandoned it when the outboard tiller threatened the heads of my decoys. Moving it to the foredeck protected the decoys and also gave some protection from errant seas. The 3 pieces - which had no hardware - were stowed below decks whilst hiding.
I never got around to sewing a spray shield before I sold it - to make way for the 2-man successor i built. It was a fine 1-man boat and I wonder where she might be nowadays.
If I still lived on Long Island, I would build myself a 16-or-17-foot open garvey - just for getting around.
All the best,
SJS
Steve
To my eye your first gunning boat is a sheer sided sneakbox. I can't quite make out the bottom but perhaps it is somewhat of a shallow V. The boat is most eye-pleasing. What attributes of a garvey does it have? The decoy rack is ingenious. It is the perfect application for the cross halving joint. I noticed the stanchions get double duty here by serving as an anchoring point.
You mentioned in the traditional rear-deck rack configuration the tiller interfered with your decoys. That brings up a question. In the pictures I see from places like Tuckerton and elsewhere the traditional build Barnegat Bay Sneakboxes have the rear deck decoy racks. But I also see a lot with front racks. Did the front rack come about because of this issue? Is it possible to use a traditional rear rack with an outboard or are the sailing/row models the only ones that truly use the rear rack like it was originally intended, i.e. tails down bills up decoy storage?
To my eye your first gunning boat is a sheer sided sneakbox. I can't quite make out the bottom but perhaps it is somewhat of a shallow V. The boat is most eye-pleasing. What attributes of a garvey does it have? The decoy rack is ingenious. It is the perfect application for the cross halving joint. I noticed the stanchions get double duty here by serving as an anchoring point.
You mentioned in the traditional rear-deck rack configuration the tiller interfered with your decoys. That brings up a question. In the pictures I see from places like Tuckerton and elsewhere the traditional build Barnegat Bay Sneakboxes have the rear deck decoy racks. But I also see a lot with front racks. Did the front rack come about because of this issue? Is it possible to use a traditional rear rack with an outboard or are the sailing/row models the only ones that truly use the rear rack like it was originally intended, i.e. tails down bills up decoy storage?
Steve Sanford
Well-known member
Good morning, Eric~
As we all know, duckboat taxonomy is an inexact science, to say the least. I say my first gunning boat was garvey-style because of the construction method. Both garveys and sneakboxes were developed long before the days of plywood or fibreglass (let's not even mention rotomolding!) and so reflected the properties of the lumber used. The planking on both vessel-types was carvel (smooth, not lapstrake) - and fastened mostly with nails. The bottoms on (most) garveys were cross-planked; the bottoms on sneakboxes were planked lengthwise. The bottom sections on garveys were straight/square; the bottom sections on sneakboxes were arcs.
Most early sneakboxes were "feather-edge" - meaning that the deck and the hull met so that there were no sides; gunwale and chine were the same thing. Garveys always had sides and the gunwale was distinct from the chine. I believe sheer-sided sneakboxes were developed later in their evolution - primarily for less-skilled builders (see John Gardiner's Classic Small Craft books).
I built my first duckboat with the sides being a key factor in both structure and design. I lofted both the plan view and profile full-size on 2 sheets of Celotex - which I leaned against the wall in my garage. I set up the transom and the amidship forms on horses and began to develope the shape with lots of clamping and bending. (Today's cordless drills and deck screws would have made the mocking-up process much easier.) In keeping with tradition the upper edge of the mahogany (Philippine) side planks remained straight. I sawed and planed the bottom edge to fit my drawing and my eye - designing as I built (which I just did with my new porch as well, by the way....). The sides pieces were screwed and glued to the transom - which was set at the usual 15-degree rake for the outboard - and were clamped to the midships frame. Up forward, I drew the sides in simultaneously with the traditional "Spanish windlass". This was simply a loop of 1/2-inch rope that I twisted repeatedly with a short length of wood to draw the sides closer and closer until I got the width and look I wanted for the bow. The spoon bow was inspired by a another boat from my youth. My Dad and his friend/mentor Brud Skidmore had built a 16-foot garvey with a rounded nose. It had the "chicken-breast" up forward and the sides and two bottom planes all came together at a nice arc (as seen in plan view). I need to scour my Mom's photo albums for the 1 or 2 photos that I know exist of the BROADBILL (of course!).
As you noted, I did put some deadrise (vee) in the bottom. The angle increases toward the bow. I did this primarily to avoid dead flat bottom sections to make life easier when the tide ran out or I was dragging across ice. I wanted as little surface area as possible in contact with the bottom or ice to reduce friction. The mild deadrise up forward also helps in breaking ice when under power. (BTW: Pride demands that I note: The junk in the background of this photo was in my neighbor's yard - not mine!)
I framed it as I saw the many clammers' garveys: hardwood frames crosswise - every 16 inches or so - and a single "keel" running lengthwise up the centerline of the vessel. (Wider craft would have additional stringers parallel to the keel, about halfway out toward the chines. ) So, except for the rounded nose, the construction was just like the hundreds of garveys I saw throughout my youth. Virtually all garveys, however, were square across the forward end - and had a "bow transom" that was usually plumb.
Regarding the stool rack on stern deck or foredeck, I will let others opine/inform. I see lots of sneakboxes at Tuckerton with both. I think the advent of both oversize decoys and slotted bags have been game-changers over the years. The "sneakbox" I am bringing to Tuckerton in 2 weeks will have no stool rack. Decoys are in bags and travel either in the forward end of the cockpit or lashed onto the foredeck.
When I get back home (on Champlain right now), I will scan a photo from the Wildfowler Decoys book. Wildfowler made some cork decoys where the undertail was saw at an angle - to create a flat area that the decoy would rest on when stowed in a stool rack, bills pointed to the sky.
All the best,
SJS
As we all know, duckboat taxonomy is an inexact science, to say the least. I say my first gunning boat was garvey-style because of the construction method. Both garveys and sneakboxes were developed long before the days of plywood or fibreglass (let's not even mention rotomolding!) and so reflected the properties of the lumber used. The planking on both vessel-types was carvel (smooth, not lapstrake) - and fastened mostly with nails. The bottoms on (most) garveys were cross-planked; the bottoms on sneakboxes were planked lengthwise. The bottom sections on garveys were straight/square; the bottom sections on sneakboxes were arcs.
Most early sneakboxes were "feather-edge" - meaning that the deck and the hull met so that there were no sides; gunwale and chine were the same thing. Garveys always had sides and the gunwale was distinct from the chine. I believe sheer-sided sneakboxes were developed later in their evolution - primarily for less-skilled builders (see John Gardiner's Classic Small Craft books).
I built my first duckboat with the sides being a key factor in both structure and design. I lofted both the plan view and profile full-size on 2 sheets of Celotex - which I leaned against the wall in my garage. I set up the transom and the amidship forms on horses and began to develope the shape with lots of clamping and bending. (Today's cordless drills and deck screws would have made the mocking-up process much easier.) In keeping with tradition the upper edge of the mahogany (Philippine) side planks remained straight. I sawed and planed the bottom edge to fit my drawing and my eye - designing as I built (which I just did with my new porch as well, by the way....). The sides pieces were screwed and glued to the transom - which was set at the usual 15-degree rake for the outboard - and were clamped to the midships frame. Up forward, I drew the sides in simultaneously with the traditional "Spanish windlass". This was simply a loop of 1/2-inch rope that I twisted repeatedly with a short length of wood to draw the sides closer and closer until I got the width and look I wanted for the bow. The spoon bow was inspired by a another boat from my youth. My Dad and his friend/mentor Brud Skidmore had built a 16-foot garvey with a rounded nose. It had the "chicken-breast" up forward and the sides and two bottom planes all came together at a nice arc (as seen in plan view). I need to scour my Mom's photo albums for the 1 or 2 photos that I know exist of the BROADBILL (of course!).
As you noted, I did put some deadrise (vee) in the bottom. The angle increases toward the bow. I did this primarily to avoid dead flat bottom sections to make life easier when the tide ran out or I was dragging across ice. I wanted as little surface area as possible in contact with the bottom or ice to reduce friction. The mild deadrise up forward also helps in breaking ice when under power. (BTW: Pride demands that I note: The junk in the background of this photo was in my neighbor's yard - not mine!)
I framed it as I saw the many clammers' garveys: hardwood frames crosswise - every 16 inches or so - and a single "keel" running lengthwise up the centerline of the vessel. (Wider craft would have additional stringers parallel to the keel, about halfway out toward the chines. ) So, except for the rounded nose, the construction was just like the hundreds of garveys I saw throughout my youth. Virtually all garveys, however, were square across the forward end - and had a "bow transom" that was usually plumb.
Regarding the stool rack on stern deck or foredeck, I will let others opine/inform. I see lots of sneakboxes at Tuckerton with both. I think the advent of both oversize decoys and slotted bags have been game-changers over the years. The "sneakbox" I am bringing to Tuckerton in 2 weeks will have no stool rack. Decoys are in bags and travel either in the forward end of the cockpit or lashed onto the foredeck.
When I get back home (on Champlain right now), I will scan a photo from the Wildfowler Decoys book. Wildfowler made some cork decoys where the undertail was saw at an angle - to create a flat area that the decoy would rest on when stowed in a stool rack, bills pointed to the sky.
All the best,
SJS
Only one of our sneakbox's had racks (stern), but decoys were stacked on the decks. Thinking back to when I was a kid sixty years ago, boxes being rowed, or grassed and towed to the hunt, had decoys on the rear deck and in the cockpit. When we motored decoys were up forward. I don't recall discussing why, it just was done that way and I still do. So I can only speculate that it is the motor that encourages the gunner to carry the rig up forward. Distributing the load makes sense too, as a motor plus decoys is a bunch of weight in the stern.
Rick Pierce
Well-known member
That is a heck of a boat…and I love the “reverse” stool rack.
Steve
Thanks for going into depth on this one. Now that I know the garvey comparison comes from the construction methods it makes a lot more sense. Your description of the method of construction is interesting and timely as I have been reading up a bit on traditional sneakbox construction which differs significantly from stitch-and-glue. From my reading I see builders use different approaches to create the hull and get the desired shape. The more I read on the subject the more I want to try myself. First I have to finish the upstairs living space at the shop. My son says we are using the sneakboxes less these days (he's correct) and I don't need to build another. He doesn't quite appreciate the satisfaction that comes from creating and making. He's more of an end-user but I'm hopeful that will change over time as it did for me.
Thanks for going into depth on this one. Now that I know the garvey comparison comes from the construction methods it makes a lot more sense. Your description of the method of construction is interesting and timely as I have been reading up a bit on traditional sneakbox construction which differs significantly from stitch-and-glue. From my reading I see builders use different approaches to create the hull and get the desired shape. The more I read on the subject the more I want to try myself. First I have to finish the upstairs living space at the shop. My son says we are using the sneakboxes less these days (he's correct) and I don't need to build another. He doesn't quite appreciate the satisfaction that comes from creating and making. He's more of an end-user but I'm hopeful that will change over time as it did for me.
Rick Pierce
Well-known member
Eric, one of the reasons I ever found this site in the first place was that I fell in love with the Barnegat sneakbox. I've always wanted to build one and own one to gun out of, even though there are almost no places down here to use one.
Rick
I'm not so sure about that. Two years ago we were hunting Cache NWR near Newport and ducks were hitting a slough that was too deep to wade yet had brush clumps protruding from the water. The tops of brush were covered in vines and thick, but not enough to effectively hide a jon boat. I badly wished I had my Brant or Broadbill on that day. We could have positioned them in the cover and been on the X. From what I saw there was endless cover for a sneakbox to hide and gun in ways that would confound the locals. I hope to take mine back there this coming season. The area is perfect for sneakboxes. Well, leave the sail at home
I'm not so sure about that. Two years ago we were hunting Cache NWR near Newport and ducks were hitting a slough that was too deep to wade yet had brush clumps protruding from the water. The tops of brush were covered in vines and thick, but not enough to effectively hide a jon boat. I badly wished I had my Brant or Broadbill on that day. We could have positioned them in the cover and been on the X. From what I saw there was endless cover for a sneakbox to hide and gun in ways that would confound the locals. I hope to take mine back there this coming season. The area is perfect for sneakboxes. Well, leave the sail at home
Last edited:
Steve Sanford
Well-known member
Eric~
I imagine this video - In the Barnegat Tradition - has long been on this site - but Sam Hunt gives some valuable instruction of his approach to building a Sneakbox - but with bent (steamed) White Oak frames instead of the original sawn White/Jersey Cedar.
As a friend of mine wisely remarked a few years ago: There's nothing like building! (He was referring to a house/barn, shop - but the truth applies!)
All the best,
SJS
Steve
I have watched that several times in the past week. It, along with a few other sneakbox build related videos, will likely be added to the Resources section. There is a lot of good information in that video that would take many typed words to cover.
I have watched that several times in the past week. It, along with a few other sneakbox build related videos, will likely be added to the Resources section. There is a lot of good information in that video that would take many typed words to cover.
Rick Pierce
Well-known member
Rick
I'm not so sure about that. Two years ago we were hunting Cache NWR near Newport and ducks were hitting a slough that was too deep to wade yet had brush clumps protruding from the water. The tops of brush were covered in vines and thick, but not enough to effectively hide a jon boat. I badly wished I had my Brant or Broadbill on that day. We could have positioned them in the cover and been on the X. From what I saw there was endless cover for a sneakbox to hide and gun in ways that would confound the locals. I hope to take mine back there this coming season. The area is perfect for sneakboxes. Well, leave the sail at home
Eric,
I looked up the Cache River permit sheet that has the map, etc.
NO spinners or electronically operated decoys on the refuge this year (can use a jerk string), which is new, AND...hunting parties have to keep a minimum distance. A party can't roll up and "hunt with you" unless you agree to it. If you don't, they are required to move (think it's 100 yards).
Also, no modified exhausts on boat motors, for whatever good that will do, and a 100-foot minimum distance between boats going in the same direction of travel.
And no afternoon scouting on the Refuge lands. Don't really know how they enforce that if you are out on the Cache River, but I have no real qualms with that either.
@Rick Pierce
Isn't the spinner rule the opposite from state WMAs? I thought they are legal again this year.
Isn't the spinner rule the opposite from state WMAs? I thought they are legal again this year.
Rick Pierce
Well-known member
May be; I haven't looked at the regs yet this year...I am about three weeks behind...
I think they did make it legal again, which really bugs me. I wish the State and Feds and Flyway would all get together.