[crs]

I was wandering if floating tubes or belly boats together with a camouflage net would do a good equipment for getting closer to water birds.
Does anyone have experience in using such equipement?

Cristian

[Malloot]

Even without camouflage you are able to get closer to waterbirds, but I have seen bellyboots with a sort of tent on top of it which camouflages you.

Maybe you could modify something like this to make it on top of a bellyboat.

http://www.jvs-outdoor.eu/camouflagehut/_r_h_g.asp

[Bird_Bill]

Used an assortment from improvised inner tubes to those purpose built. Never tried any with my serious SLR stuff aboard. Draft is problematic, as is general robustness of build when in small gravel bottom creeks and rivers here. Old snags,various other debris adds thrills and spills. Chance of sticking my toes into gaping grip of a 50 kg plus alligator snapping turtle a very real and unattractive thought here. Suppose in some specific cases...sandy bottomed lakes with no current and steep quick emergent zones there might be some suitability. For about the same money as Belly tubes as there called here, one person injection molded kayaks can be had. Feel they're far superiour, need maybe 10 cm of water to float, has tremendous gear storage capabilties, can be easily manuvered one-handed with sculling paddle, can be camo'd by simply inter-weaving native brush and grass, plus pretty much no chance at all of ANY turtle latching onto tootsies. Dont fear snakes, one of worse encounters ever resulted in sutures after a soft-shelled turtle got ahold of me. Thought of going "bottoms up" with one of those critters again is unappealing.

[crs]

Thank you for the answers.

Yes, Malloot, a tent over the belly boat must be usefull.

If animals should not be a problem in Romania keeping the camera dry, as Bird_Bill says, might be a problem.

Cristian

[Swifty49]

When I am not birding I go flyfishing and use a float-tube a lot. You need to use chest waders and fins, which fit over the wader boots, for propulsion. Going afloat in a tube without fins is ridiculous! I wouldn't be risking expensive camera equipment in a float tube either.

[Bird_Bill]

Guess using a tube without fins might be considered ridiculous in certain enviroments. Here in fast moving streams and marsh/swamps often far less than a meter deep, its considered dangerous and laughable in that order.In deep,slow water belly tubes with fins might have some advantages. Just have not found those advantages here.Not to say your results may vary. If an (D)SLR is going to be employed in conjunction with a belly tube, recommend that a waterproof housing be used also. Housings start at about $1,200 usd. Longer focal length lens usually require custom fabricated housing's, can expect to spend $4K to $5K easily.

[Swifty49]

Originally Posted by Bird_Bill

Guess using a tube without fins might be considered ridiculous in certain enviroments. Here in fast moving streams and marsh/swamps often far less than a meter deep, its considered dangerous and laughable in that order.In deep,slow water belly tubes with fins might have some advantages. Just have not found those advantages here.Not to say your results may vary. If an (D)SLR is going to be employed in conjunction with a belly tube, recommend that a waterproof housing be used also. Housings start at about $1,200 usd. Longer focal length lens usually require custom fabricated housing's, can expect to spend $4K to $5K easily.

One of the earliest things I learned about float-tubing is that you never use one in running water! A pontoon boat or kick boat would be more appropriate and safer than a float-tube where you are actually sitting in the water and your legs and feet are dangling and vulnerable to rocks, roots, underwater obstructions, etc. Plus it goes without saying that you wear an inflatable buoyancy aid.


.

[jmepler]

Originally Posted by Bird_Bill

For about the same money as Belly tubes as there called here, one person injection molded kayaks can be had. Feel they're far superiour, need maybe 10 cm of water to float, has tremendous gear storage capabilties, can be easily manuvered one-handed with sculling paddle, can be camo'd by simply inter-weaving native brush and grass, plus pretty much no chance at all of ANY turtle latching onto tootsies.

I think that using a kayak would be preferable to using a tube in most situations.

It would be much easier to keep your gear dry in a kayak and with a little care many birds are quite approachable, even without camouflage.

There was some discussion of birding from a kayak at this thread.

Mike

[Bird_Bill]

Hope not Im coming off as abrasive to anyone, but have had tragedies involving belly tubes here. Happens with all watercraft,whatever means takes one on water, be safe.

Old town tripper turns 31 this year. Have a 2 place kayak for daytrips.
Regardless of mode, waterbourne approach presents opportunities unimaginable if one's accustomed to terra firma.

[jmepler]

Originally Posted by Bird_Bill

Regardless of mode, waterbourne approach presents opportunities unimaginable if one's accustomed to terra firma.

Opportunities to "go swimming" also will increase if one is distracted from controlling their watercraft by watching or photographing birds.

When I am in my kayak I always wear my PFD (personal flotation device) despite the fact that 90% of the time I am in water that is waist deep or less.

Mike

[Bird_Bill]

Originally Posted by Bird_Bill

be safe.

Can't say often enough.

PFD, throw line, whistle... minimum always aboard. Dressing for occasion also.
Hypothermia easily can happen in summertime. If one ventures solo, let someone else know.

[seeofbirds]

Hi there

I have seen this post only today so not sure if you still wanted some feedback regarding belly boats equipment. I have used the floating tubes and they do offer a good alternative to getting very close to birds. I have used them because I also fish so I purchased one but it doubles up for when I want to bird watch too.

This blog offers some useful advice.