Little Bat in Big Winds (1 Viewer)

My granddaughter and I found this little bat on Oct. 6th (about noon) in the swimming pool. We had had fierce Santa Ana winds the night before (40 to 70 mph in various areas--don't know what the velocity was in our canyon) and I think he was blown into the water. I can't guess how long the poor thing was in there, but it is amazing it was still alive and swimming/staying afloat; it must have an incredible constitution. It hardly seems possible that something so tiny could have survived this ordeal. We got it out with a stick and let it dry in the warm air. There were still mild Santa Ana conditions which helped it dry. We put it in a towel and left it in an outdoor aviary to protect it while it dried. We checked on it a few times during the day and were relieved to find it still alive. It even moved to the top of the towel and later retreated into the folds. In the early evening, I went to check again and found it was gone. There were several spots in the enclosure where the wiring had pulled away from the frame and we guessed he got out on his own and flew off. Very impressive sonar.
The location was in southeast San Diego County about 25 miles inland of the coast in the Peninsular Mountains. The bat was very small--about 2 1/2 inches. We have come to the conclusion that it is a Western Small-footed Bat, Myotis ciliolabrum . I just bought a 'beginners' bat book and at first we thought it was a California Bat, Myotis californicus, but when we went online to see photos and get more information we ran across the Small-footed and decided it looked more like our bat. The book did say that the California Bat didn't fly well in winds which is why I figured it was blown into the water. I guess the very similar Small-footed would also have a hard time in the wind, especially Santa Anas(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Ana_winds)
Is it possible to ID by these photos? The fur is wet which makes things harder--he flew off before I had a chance to photograph him dry! So glad he did-I'm amazed he made it--we really thought he was a goner. I'm trying to chronicle the flora and fauna of my area and would like to have a positive ID.
Thanks, Sue

Hi Sue. I'm better on snakes than bats. Inclined to agree with your thought
M. ciliolabrum. For two reasons, shown in the keys below.

First is the nose. Which apparently many feel a skull examination is often necessary to differentiate one from the other. M. ciliolabrum has broader nose, compared to M. californicus.

Second, is keeled Calcar of M. californicus. Calcar is the membrane between the back feet and tail.
As understood, M. ciliolabrum does not have keeled Calcar
The following link has a graphic that depicts the Calcar.
http://www.hastingsreserve.org/mammals/Bats/KeelCalcar.html

Something I'm not clear on, is the how the Calcar is configured on M. ciliolabrum. None of the keys or docs I've seen indicates Calcar of M. ciliolabrum is keeled. Your first pic especially seems to point at M. ciliolabrum, in that regard. If you could brighten your images and crop those features, it might define what you're looking for. Fearful, the angle may not be capable of showing it, if it is M. californicus

Here's a couple keys, perhaps you have seen.

Below has some side by side comparisons of both species, together.
http://www.cnhp.colostate.edu/teams/zoology/cbwg/pdfs/CO Bat Key Schorr and Navo 2012.pdf

Below is more general, still some good points, ie...Calcor
Will display M. californicus, but M.ciliolabrum is directly below
http://www.hastingsreserve.org/mammals/Bats/BatsMe_Mc.html#MyotisCalifornicus

Perhaps someone better versed than I, can use the keys, and give something more useful.

Thanks for posting the links Bill, I hadn't seen the drawings. According to the Colostate link, both bats have a keeled calcar. I did blow-up and lighten my best photo and I think you are right that the angle is not good. The head shape seems good for the small-footed. My son got photos also, maybe he has something more definitive. If you notice, you can see what appears to be a blood sucking thing on the bat. I picked it off of him before putting him in the towel. I wonder if finding the size of whatever that creepy bug is could help with determining the size of the foot. The small-footed is less than 8 mm and the Californian greater. I may have to just list that it could be either one. Thanks so much for the links and the help.
Sue

You're welcome, Sue. Didn't see that on the calcar for small-footed. That settles that, though. There is peculiar pattern of white aggregate in the surface material, where the pic (crop) is taken. Sort of a "V" shape, pointing at the tail. In the lower right corner of your crop frame. If that spot could be found, few measurements could be made, that would give dimensions.

Not sure what that "thing" is. Not a tick or chigger.