Hello to all Baidarka builders and fans

One of my main resources building my first baidarka is the article from David Zimmerly

http://www.arctickayaks.com/PDF/ZimmerlyVarious/SBJ-1-HoleAleut.pdf

which seems to be a widely accepted reference article and quoted in many building projects.

On page 3 Zimmerly writes: "None of the internal structure needs to exactly copy that of the Aleut original."

I want to draw your attention to the following points:

1) stern section
in the picture just above that statement (page 3 top-right) you notice a clearance between the horizontal stern plates, aft deck stringer and the stern piece - more detail of the same on page 6, picture in 2nd row

2)cockpit - front side
in picture page 6 bottom right you notice a clearance between the front deck stringer and the masik, accompanied by a similar clearance on the part of the stringer that dives beneath the cockpit coaming

3) bow section
on page 6 top right you see a picture of the bow section which clearly shows that the radius of the bow piece is smaller that the radius of the horizontal bow plate - mind the shadow that the bow piece is throwing on the plate

4) dowels
in the pictures quoted above we can see that both front and stern plates are doweled to the gunwales by only 1 dowel

My interpretation is that

A)
all these clearances have been built on purpose to assist the flex of the boat - 1 & 2 together with the typical shafting and lashing of the keel seem to support the upward flex, while 3 supports a twisting flex of the front section.

B)
the single dowel to the bow and stern horizontal plates allow them to twist - whereas 2 or more dowels would block any movement of these parts.

In none of the modern baidarka building descriptions I found sofar any mention about such clearances. They also frequently tell you to use 2 dowels for the front and stern plates which would efficiently prevent the flex that was said to be a major advantage of baidarkas.

Coming back to Zimmerly's statement about "exactly copying internal structures" my preliminary opinion is that this statement is wrong.

What is your judgement about the above:
Has this sofar been overlooked / neglected / found insignificant / am I misunderstanding something fundamentally here)

Thanks for a good discussion and
Kind regards from Austria
Mike