An interesting image of a ..... is it a species of pelican? Whatever it is, I find the processing not convincing. The tail reflection confuses, should it not be slightly deflected in POV by refraction and also not visible at exactly the same colour and density of the real tail? It presents to me as a bird on a log, with another tail sticking out from behind the foreground log, it's just not believable. Sorry if this critique is too terse, but for me this image defies reality.
Photo editing of this nature requires an advanced knowledge of perspective and reflection. It's not easy to replicate without reference. If you had the reference in the first place, then PP would not be required . Anyone who has not got lengthy experience on top of formal art training is doomed to have a hard time with this kind of photo manipulation. That said, everyone has the right to learn by posting their work and receiving honest feedback. My critique is offered in that spirit and hope it is received as such.
In my painting career I can remember too many times feeling totally pleased with work I had done (now I consider that feeling a red light), only to wake up the next morning, go into my studio, look at the work I was so pleased with and wonder who the hell littered my studio with such garbage. Good work comes from being your own harshest critic. There is a colour shift between the foot on the log and the reflected foot that is more convincing than the tail, try to replicate this in the tail reflection, morph the shape and rotate it slightly upward plus desaturating it to give more of a reflected look. Hope this helps.