Question regarding ABYC H-29 in USA

ABYC defines a Canoe and Kayak as follows. However It goes on to say that a small vessel thats transom measures over 45% of the crafts total width at its widest point may not be considered a canoe? So can it be a Kayak? or is it simply deemed a Boat etc? This was just changed by the USCG to follow ABYC standards and has played a role in one of our products we considered a Kayak yet due to a sit on seat it was deamed a Canoe. However I question whether the Transom measurement voids all canoe and Kayak classifications?


ABYC H-29 Standard Provides The Following Definitions:
Kayak: A watercraft designed to be manually propelled, typically without provision for auxiliary power, with the occupant intended to be seated with legs approximately 90 degrees from the torso.

Canoe: A watercraft, designed to be manually propelled, with or without provision for auxiliary power, with neither end having a transverse dimension greater than 45% of its maximum beam and conforms to the following specifications:

CANOE LENGTH MAXIMUM CANOE BEAM [WIDTH]
Up to 14 ft (4.25 m) 1/3 of the canoe length
14 ft -16 ft (max 4.9 m) 1/4 of the canoe length
Over 16 ft 1/5 of the canoe length
This means that a small vessel whose transom measures over 45% of its total width at its widest part may not be considered a Canoe (i.e. square stern canoe), even if it can be effectively paddled, and it will be considered a Boat, namely a monohull boat, e.g. dinghy, skiff, microskiff, Jon boat, and thereby fall under Section 183 Subpart D – Safe Powering .

 

You can market them as a kayak withoug legal repercussions. ABYC has a set of standards often used by the USCG, but don't have the force of law unless adopted by the USCG. As far I know the USCG classifies them as "vessel under oars" and don't care about width/length ratios.

 

The USCG has adopted the ABYC standards for kayak and canoes now. I believe this was done in 2019. I spoke with ABYC and they are not exactly sure about this specific question either but will be getting back with me about it. Bottom line is a Kayak and a Canoe are one in the same with the only difference being how one sits on or in the watercraft per the definition. I look forward to a response from ABYC and or the USCG directly on this matter. Just wasnt sure if anyone here has ran into it yet and addressed it to the USCG and ABYC.

 

That is a question that came up occasionally when I worked in the USCG office of Boating Safety. Back then our usual answer was, if it looks like a duck, etc. Even then we referred people to the ABYC standard, but it was not a regulation. But now the USCG has adopted the ABYC definition as a regulation. Typically a canoe or kayak is considered a manually propelled boat, propelled by paddles. Canoes you sit on a seat or kneel to paddle the boat. There a no decks. Most are completely open. There are boats that look like a canoe but aren't. For instance look up Gheenoe. Gheenoe – Established 1970 https://gheenoe.net/ At first glance it looks a lot like a canoe, but, it's too wide at the transom, and is propelled by an outboard and has a modified planing underbody. The USCG considers it an outboard motorboat. There are outboard powered canoes, but the end with the engine is flat like a regular motor boat, but very narrow to preserve the canoe shape. They don't exceed the 45% rule. Again there are variations, Some canoes with two pointy ends have a mount that goes on the side near the stern (or one end of the canoe), that can mount a small gas outboard or an electric trolling motor. These are still canoes.

Kayaks are different. Yes they have pointy ends. but you sit down in the bottom of the kayak in a small cockpit. The forward and aft ends are covered by a deck. Most are propelled with a double bladed paddle.

So to answer your question. If the transom is over 45% wider than the maximum beam it's not a canoe, and it's not a Kayak. A good example is an Adirondack Guide boat. It has the basic shape of a canoe, it is much wider, and propelled by oars. Our Complete Line of Row Boats from Adirondack Guideboat https://adirondack-guide-boat.com/row-boats/ If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck ,it's a duck. But just because it looks similar to a canoe doesn't make it a canoe. It has to fit within the definition.

 

This is what I am gathering to be true. And how I would understand it as well However the USCG and ABYC needs to make it clear that anything with a transom width over 45% of beam is not a canoe or Kayak. I know a manufacture who spent 10s of thousands of dollars tooling and producing a boat prior to acceptance of the ABYC ruling into USCG standards that was a kayak by USCG previous definition and is now a Canoe due to how one sits in or on it, forcing other regulations to be followed. And I am seeing countless small crafts with transoms being marketed as kayaks and canoes not following the new standard for sale in stores everywhere. Most of these are imported blow molded products or rotomolded products. I contacted ABYC and the gentleman I spoke with agree'd that there is still quite confusion is these definitions and would be getting back to me when he had an answer.

 

..with every problem comes an opportunity (generally).. save death .. use the rule to market the not quite legally a canoe as something different

@Ike got you started with the Gheenoe..

 

• The USCG has published a policy paper for Canoes and Kayaks on their website for manufacturers at Policy – SafeAFloat.com https://safeafloat.com/policies-letters/ It is a PDF file and can be downloaded. It is dated 30 August 2023, so it is the current policy.
• If you have further questions I suggest you contact the Coast Guard at rbscompliance@uscg.mil I also have a page on canoes and kayaks on my web. (I need to update it.) site Boat Building Standards for Canoes And Kayaks https://newboatbuilders.com/pages/canoeskayaks.html that references the ABYC standard and the Canadian standard, which mirrors the ABYC Standard.

PS: I updated my page.

 

Hey Fallguy, don't get me started on Gheenoe. I spent years dealing with them. They were a headache.

 

Ike, I understand and have read the policy. It still does not address the 45% of beam and whether it refers to just canoes or both canoes and kayaks. By the definition as set forth. I could say my canoe is a kayak if i dont have a raised seat and sit on the floor. I have reached out to ABYC and they assured me they would get me an answer and that the definition may need updated again as the person I spoke to agree'd that a Canoe and Kayak are one in the same other than how one sits in them. So therefore both should be deemed a boat if they have a transom wider than 45% of max beam and have to adhere to level floatation and testing requirements of a monohull craft and have a HIN unlike a Kayak. There is many out there and I believe Rhino Manufacturing which has a recall on one of their models the Beavertail Attack right now may be because of this exact reason. A square boat with a clear transom for motors and rated like a Kayak. When they gotta fit enough foam in that little thing to float the capacity of 350lbs there wont be anywhere to sit. LOL I guess we will watch the recall and see what happens but my guess it the capacity rating changes and it becomes a mono hull boat. Another one is a boat called the water feather. Same situation a square boat using a canoe and kayak rating. when its clearly a mono hull boat with a wide transom for mounting a motor. There is more but these 2 are extremely obvious to a boat manufacturer whom is familiar with the coast guard regulations for builders. And a friend went thru this once with a boat designed prior to the USCG adapting ABYC definitions and it caused issues after spending 10s of thousands of dollars tooling the molds. They were forced to follow the canoe definition rather than the Kayak due to a raised seat. Not a real serious issue but for crafts with a wide transom it can be a real big deal when they have to start accounting for level floatation etc etc. and finding room for cubic feet of floatation foam in these tiny crafts with no place to put it. I will send an email off to that compliance email you provided. But this is a issue that needs addressed and resolved before builders spend 10s of thousands of dollars tooling and designing these type crafts only to learn they did them wrong due to a very open argument regulation.

 

Email sent to that email, This rule is the most ridiculous rules I have seen from the USCG. Talk about loop holes, There is many here and they need to make the definition of both crystal clear and resolve this issue. Not only for easy clarification but also so manufacturers dont assume one thing based on the poorly written definitions and spend 10s of thousands of dollars designing and tooling a Kayak thats a Canoe or vs versa and ending up with bigger problems later. We shall see whom reaches back out to my emails and phone calls and what becomes of it.

 

So, the rule is designed for the stability and flotation requirements?

Seems to me the rule ought to kick in for beams exceeding some number, i.e. 1M

But, I suppose they assume power on a transom..

 

I would assume that the answer would be yes due to companies adding transoms with the ability to hold outboard motors on canoes and kayaks has become standard. Obviously there has been narrow transoms on canoes for years but now were seeing boats designed for rotomolding with transoms that are very wide and capable of holding large outboards and longtail mud motors for hunting and fishing purposes. Sure they may rate them for 2hp or under and claim its a Kayak or canoe based on the definition of a kayak yet will tell you oh ive seen 5hp or even larger motors on them. At some point there needs to be a cut off and or clear definition for a Kayak as there is with a canoe. It would seem quite simple to make both canoes and kayaks hold the same definition regardless of how one might sit in it or on it and this would clear this matter up real quick and easy. There is no reason otherwise that I can find for them not to be the same by definition of your adding power to them. Canoes are very clear and precise in definition with and without power. A kayak should be the same with power. I mean if someones going to add motors they all need to meet the same guidelines and regulations with regards to floatation. requirements as they are essentially one and the same. Remove the confusion and loopholes simply by defining them both the same way with power and transoms. Here is the link to the circulation with regards to definition. https://safeafloat.com/wp-content/u...icy-23-06-Definition-of-Canoes-and-Kayaks.pdf

 

I hope they answer your question. All of the people I worked with are gone, except the head guy, Jeff Ludwig. I'm sure he will assign it to someone. But you may not like the answer. Their regulatory authority is very limited. The Federal Boat Safety Act is very specific, "minimum standards for safety" The Coast Guard is required to justify regulations based on need for safety. Whether or not they can do that with canoes and kayak is problematic. There are not a lot of fatalities in that class of watercraft like there is with outboard motorboats. If you read that policy paper again, that's all it is. It is not a regulation. It has no force of law. It's a policy. The only time we ever got involved in the financial end of it was we had to prepare an impact statement for a proposed regulation on how it would impact small businesses. If a proposed regulation will make it so expensive to accomplish, and drive them out of business, then the proposed regulation will likely go nowhere. I've seen that numerous times. And it would have to go through the regulatory process; written, published as a proposal, and so on. They may also simply publish a request for comments such as, "The U.S. Coast Guard is considering proposing regulations for Canoes and Kayaks" with a long explanation of what is being considered. There would be a period to comment ranging from 90 to 180 days. Then all the comments would be considered, which, depending on how many comments are received, could be anywhere up to 180 days. Anyway, make whatever you are proposing very specific. They will tell you if they can do it or not, and why.

By the way, the largest boatbuilding business category in the USA is rotomolded kayaks. The last time I saw stats on that was in the early 2o00's but I can't imagine it is less now. Back then they were (all the US manufacturers of kayaks.) producing over 250,000 units per year, most of which were sold outside the US. So you may want to research if there is an ISO standard for Canoes and Kayaks. Back then there was not. I checked the current ISO standards for Stability and Buoyancy, and for powering. They exclude Canoes and Kayaks, and I could not find a separate standard for Canoes and Kayaks, I could not find a definition in the ISO standards for a canoe or kayak. So, for now the ABYC definition is what we have. According to NMMA there were 1.2 million Kayaks sold in the USA 2016 alone. The Department of Commerce says that 9.2 million people went canoeing in 2021. The USCG reported that there were 195 Canoe/Kayak deaths in 2022. They didn't split that into so many in canoes and so many in kayaks, Not many compared to 9.2 million. But even one is too many.

Kayak statistics Kayaking Statistics, Facts, Trivia (2024) - Kayak Scout https://www.kayakscout.com/kayaking-statistics/
Kayaks sold in the USA (not made, sold) How Many Kayaks Are Sold Each Year? Detailed Guide - 2022 - Kayakpapa https://kayakpapa.com/how-many-kayaks-are-sold-each-year/

 

Notice that the rules sited in the initial post are NOT exclusive. A boat could be both a kayak and a canoe. Unless I am missing something.

Also many people have added electric motors and propellers to their "kayaks" and "canoes". I'm not sure whether they would be considered outboard motors, inboard inboard motors, or something else.

And many "kayaks" have transoms.

I think the racing community has rather specific standards - kayakers use two bladed paddles, and sit, canoeists use one bladded paddles and kneel - but the rest of the boating community doesn't always use either of those standards.

Also many "canoes" in the whitewater community are created by removing the seat (if there is one) of a kayak, and replacing it with something to kneel on.

And in both cases, kayaks and canoes have often been altered to be usable as sailcraft, and/or linked together to create catamarans.

It used to be in most of the paddling community that "kayaks" were decked (covered) boats, "canoes" were open (uncovered) boats - though canoes could be covered with inflatable bags which effectively made them decked. But over the years many open boats have been called kayaks, because that name sounds more cool and apparently sells more boats. "Canoes" are viewed as out of date, even when they look and act exactly the same.

A "Polynesian voyaging canoe" can be large enough to transport an entire small community - see
In Search of the Ancient Polynesian Voyaging Canoe https://archive.hokulea.com/ike/kalai_waa/kane_search_voyaging_canoe.html

E.g., the ideal length/width ratio for a kayak or canoe depends on the paddler, conditions and usage. Sea kayakers who like to paddle fairly fast might might want a ratio of 10-13 or more. I'm not sure, but think racing boats tend to be in that category too - and a few have even longer and thinner. A fishing kayak or canoe might need more stability, as would a boat used as a diving platform. Whitewater kayaks that are paddled down rivers at high speed also need to have a high ratio, but some whitewater playboat kayaks and open water surf kayaks that are designed to play with waves have rather small ratios - sometimes between 2 or 3.

And adding an outrigger changes everything about stability.

All I'm really saying is that the ABCY definition does not match common usage in the boating community - in part because there is no agreed upon common usage.

What does the USCG intend to do with these rules? And how will it impact existing "kayaks" and "canoes", and what people can do with them?

I'd like the USCG to avoid ruining things by outlawing the boats that are the most fun.

 

On a related matter, I was once sent really and truly down the rabbit hole when I was asked by my GM at a beach resort to please collect the necessary documents on our rental rotomolded kayaks for the resort's insurance company. Nobody, including the insurance company, had the slightest idea what those documents might be. But there must be something that says they are compliant, or approved, or safe, or something, right? Nope - not that I ever found. This was 20 years ago.