This paper provides a thorough review and reanalysis of the fossil avifauna from Fossil Lake, Oregon. Fossils from this site were deposited during the Pleistocene. In addition to considering new material from the site, the paper makes reference to previous studies conducted by two earlier paleontologists (Cope and Shufeldt) and reassesses some of their work. The paper is long and in places quite technical, with long detailed discussions of certain bones. The paper also deals with all birds found at the site, although the majority of the fossils come from waterfowl species.

The discussion of swan bones is seven pages long (pp. 159-165). Prior to Howard’s work, four species of swans had been identified from the site: Trumpeter Swan (Cygnus buccinator), Tundra ("Whistling") Swan (C. columbianus), and two extinct species (C. paloregonus and C. matthewi). In her reassessment, Howard ascertained that in fact there was only sufficient evidence to support the identification of two species, Trumpeter Swan and C. paloregonus.

Nowhere in the document does it suggest that Mute Swan (C. olor) fossils occur at the site, or that anyone has ever suggested that they do. There are, however, numerous references to Mute Swans in the paper, which is perhaps the source of the confusion. References to Mute Swan are made because Howard considered the extinct species C. paloregonus to be more closely related to Mute Swan than to either of the extant North American species. At the time this paper was written, the modern Cygnus swans were apparently split into two genera, with Mute Swan placed in the genus Sthenelides. Howard considered the extinct species paloregonus to belong in this genus, rather than Cygnus, and many aspects of the description of its bones refer to similarities with Mute Swan to support this classification.

For example, in her summary passage (click here), Howard states that Shufeldt’s identification of certain bones as belonging to a goose species ("Anser condoni") were in error because he did not have any Mute Swan specimens for comparison. A careful reading of the detailed fossil descriptions that follows demonstrates that Howard believed that Shufeldt made his misidentification because he thought that all swans have a furcula similar to that of Trumpeter and Tundra Swans. Had he had a specimen of a Mute Swan (or another of the "Sthenelides" swans) he would have known that some swans have a furcula that resembles that of a goose. This knowledge would have allowed him to recognize the bones he assigned to Anser condoni as belonging to a swan and would have led him to the conclusion that Howard draws, which is that these bones belong to paloregonus.

It is clear from several passages in the paper that Howard did not think that the fossils she assigns to Sthenelides (Cygnus) paloregonus (including the bones Shufeldt identified as Anser condoni) belonged to Mute Swans. Several quotes (click here) from the paper demonstrate that she considered paloregonus and Mute Swan to be distinct (though closely related) species. Probably the best demonstration that Howard did not consider Mute Swan to have occurred at Fossil Lake is the species list she gives on p. 190, which does not include Mute Swan either in the historic "List according to Shufeldt (1913)" or in Howard’s "List as now amended".

The length of the section on swans precludes me from posting all of it. If you are interested in the entire document I’d suggest you contact the Carnegie Institution, which kindly gave permission for me to post extracts on this web page.