210 University of California Publications in Zoology (Vou. 17 
examination of the extensive series of white-fronted geese in the collec- 
tion of that institution. 
In the spring of 1916 a conversation took place between the junior 
author of this paper and Mr. George Neale, in the course of which the 
latter described what he called a ‘‘tule goose’’ or ‘‘timber goose,’’ 
distinguished from the common white-fronted goose by its much 
greater size, its call notes, and certain details in its habits. In fur- 
therance of our efforts to ascertain the specific identity of this large 
goose we obtained during the ensuing winter, from the two donors to 
whom acknowledgments are made above, specimens as listed below, 
all taken in the vicinity of Butte Creek, near West Butte, Sutter 
County, California. 
The numerals used in the following pages for reference to speci- 
mens are the collection numbers of the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology. 
All measurements are in millimeters. Color terms are from Ridgeway, 
1912. 
From Judge Henshaw: Nine tule geese, five adult males, three 
adult females, and one immature female (nos. 27175-27177, 27572, 
27573, 27575-27578) ; five white-fronted geese (nos. 27574, 27579- 
27582). 
From Mr. Neale: Two tule geese, one entire specimen, an adult 
male (no. 27134), and one specimen consisting of the head and neek 
of an adult bird, preserved in alcohol (no. 27583). 
There is in addition in the Museum collection, a series of thirty-six 
skins of the white-fronted goose, from the vicinity of Los Banos, 
Merced County, California. Examination was also made of the series 
of forty-three specimens of the latter species, from the same locality, 
in the collection of the California Academy of Sciences. 
The first specimen received of the so-called tule goose was a male. 
The great size of this individual was at first attributed to age, and 
it was suggested that very old ganders of our common species might 
sometimes attain exceptional dimensions, much greater than the mode. 
But the acquisition of additional specimens refuted this conjecture, 
for females were later secured which in spite of a notable difference 
in their ages (one of the specimens being immature) were all of 
approximately the same size, and much larger than the common form 
of white-fronted goose. 
Except for the immature plumage, which is worn for at least 
the first year, the external appearance of these birds yields no reliable 
clue to their age. There is a general belief, however, that the black 
