212man,
The FAR 29 amendment 40 was inclusive of blades as bird targets, 47 added emphasis, but the requirement was clear in 45 (the 92 was certified to 45 originally, then added 47).
As a note (with recognition that this thread is in La-La Land where we have few facts, and are discussing vapourware) a bird strike on an unprepared tail rotor blade would probably remove the blade, which would shortly remove the TR gearbox assembly (due to the whirling imbalance of the disk stressing the gearbox housing and feet).
We must recognize that a water landing has some probability of a tail strike and TGB breakage due to the landing, and not as a cause of the ditch.
There is little doubt that HK officials will find the root cause and report same, they are known world-wide as professionals in the British Empire mold of thinking.
In other words, have patience, ppruners!