Jim,

I appreciate your comments on the Richardson's Goose. After your post I was
prompted to read the Canada Goose chapter in Palmer ("Handbook of North
American Birds, Vol. 2, Waterfowl (Part 1)". On page 192, under the
subspecies heading "hutchinsii",  I read "They are very small in size and
rather light-colored, with pale breast; the bill appears stubby (for
example, when compared with the typical 'parvipes'); white cheek usually
continuous across the chin; ...."

Perhaps you can give us some further comment on the chin since you say "The
white cheek patches are typically separate and do not join under the chin
[i.e. the chin is black, not white]. " Does Palmer's word "usually" and
your word "typically" put the two of you in agreement - to a large
degree?  :).

According to Palmer, Minima is smaller than hutchinsii and "White of cheeks
continuous across chin, or interrupted there partially or completely by a
black stripe; even the entire chin may be black with white of cheeks
reduced in area and having black feathers intermingled."

Clearly size doesn't count, at least when separating species, and a black
chin may not help much either.

Bill shape may be the most reliable thing for identification, but viewing
angle will be a field problem. Coloration may be good but then there is
parvipes, which can be quite pale on the breast. Palmer doesn't mention
back color, though.

One problem, as I see it, is that if we don't know where a particular bird
has bred in the Arctic, we won't really be able to throw it into the right
pigeon hole, so to speak. Do you know if the scientific studies, upon which
the final A.O.U. decision to split was based, discuss plumage difference
between "hutchinsii" and the small races of the Canada Goose?

And what about hybrids?! I love the prospects. I predict that gull
arguments are going to subside for a while, to be replaced by years of
goose arguments. When the migrants arrive many many fields of dreams await
the optimist.

Charlie

>Most of the standard reference books [Kortright, Bellrose, Bent,
>"Waterfowl of the World"] discuss subspecies and one can not be certain if
>the name used is correct. Sibley illustrates one of the small Canadas, but
>gives it the wrong name.
>
>Richardson's Goose is easy to pick out of a flock at a distance, not
>because of size, but because of coloration. The back is much grayer [not
>brown] and the chest is much paler. The birds are about 2/3 the size of
>migrant Canada geese and half the size if resident Canada geese [note:
>migrant Canadas average smaller than resident Canadas].  The bill is
>closer to an equilateral triangle in shape than an isoceles triangle. The
>white cheek patches are typically seperate and do not join under the chin
>[i.e. the chin is black, not white].  A white neck band may or may not be
>present [this is not a useful character for identicication].
>
>If I were to revise the Yellow Book, I would list Richardson's as a
>regular annual bird [solid black square] in Prince George's, Kent,
>Caroline, Queen Anne, Talbot, Dorchester and Worcester. It is slightly
>less common, but not rare, in Cecil, Harford, Baltimore, Howard,
>Montgomery, and Anne Arundel. Some counties, like Calvert and Washington,
>just do not get large flocks of migrant Canada geese in winter, so the
>records are fewer but the species is not unexpected.  I bet there are
>records for Garrett and Allegany.
>
>Good Birding!
>
>Jim