Date: 1/4/19 6:27 pm
From: Joe Roller <jroller9...>
Subject: [cobirds] Retraction on usefulness of leg and foot size for swan ID
I looked at myriad photos of both species by googling"Tundra Swan on ice"
"Trumpeter Swan on Ice." That eliminates photos of swans aswimming, their
legs hidden
from view.

When feet are visible, smaller feet are seen on photos of Tundras, but not
on Trumpeters.

BUT *leg thickness* is not too helpful. I saw many photos of Tundra Swans
with thin legs, which no
Trumpeters seem to have; BUT some Tundras have thick legs too.

So pending more input, I would say that an ancillary field mark may be
"thin legs,
think Tundra." Thick legs could be either species.
Foot size, which is usually hard to see, seems to be more reliable, with
Trumpeters shopping
for size EEE's, and Tundra's for size C.

Note that Sibley draws both species with rather thick legs.
And on Swan ID sites, I saw NO mention of all this as useful for sorting
them out. So it's probably not!

My next step (ouch) is to go to the Collections Department at the Denver
Museum of Nature and Science, toting one of those hefty metal shoe size
measurers used by salesmen.
In the meantime, look at your own photos and look for swans walking on ice.

NOT the first time I've been wrong!
Expert opinions are welcome.
Joe Roller, Denver

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+<unsubscribe...>
To post to this group, send email to <cobirds...>
To view this discussion on the web visit<3DkdOs443kRdw...>
For more options, visit

Join us on Facebook!