The Wilson Journal of Ornithology 123(3):650-661, 2011 
Ornithological Literature 
Robert B. Payne. Review Editor 
EVOLUTION AND TAXONOMY OF WHITE¬ 
CHEEKED GEESE. By Beilin W. Anderson. 
A war Books. Blythe, California, USA. 2010: 495 
pages and 24 color plates. ISBN: 0-9708504-4-1. 
$30.00 (soft cover), $40.00 (hard cover).—In 2006 
and 2007, two volumes on White-cheeked (more 
generally ‘Canada ) Geese ( Urania canadensis s. 
1.) by Harold C. Hanson described and named more 
than 200 subspecific taxa in six species in this 
complex. Both volumes were published posthu¬ 
mously by B. W. Anderson, who also contributed 
extensively to the second volume, essentially 
completing it for his Friend and colleague Hanson. 
Now we have a volume that extends and justifies 
Hanson s work and presents Anderson’s own 
independent studies of these geese. I earlier 
reviewed both of Hanson’s books ( Wilson Journal 
of Ornithology 119: 514-517, 2007; 121:658-660 
2009). 
Anderson begins (page 4) by presenting a brief 
review of the historical classification of White¬ 
cheeked Geese (hereafter W-c G). starting with 
that by Conover in 1948 (Field Museum of 
Natural Histoty Publication, Zoology Series 
Volume 13, Part 1, Number 2)—and gets it 
wrong. Conover used the English name Tundra 
Goose for Branta I. leucopareia, not Aleutian 
Goose as stated by Anderson; that subspecific 
name was not then restricted to W-c G in the 
Aleutian Islands. Conover included the subspecies 
occidentalis in the species leucopareia, not in 
canadensis as stated, included four rather than 
three subspecies in canadensis , and did not 
recognize or even mention “the extinct kurilensis 
of the Kuril [sic] and Commander Islands" which 
was never named that (presumably = Branta 
hutchinsii asiatica Aldrich. 1946). Thus, Conover 
recognized eight, not nine, taxa of W-c G. This 
beginning does not instill a great deal of 
confidence in what follows. 
The history continues with Delacour's 1954 
Waterfowl of the World —skipping his basic 1951 
taxonomic work in American Museum Novitates 
1537—and covers several other compendia 
mostly based on Dclacour, by authors not 
generally considered alpha taxonomists. Absent 
is any mention of the 1957 Fifth Edition of the 
AOU Check-list, which is frequently discussed in 
quite negative terms in later pages. On page 7 
there is a review of the present "commonly 
assumed (apparently 1957) taxonomy, except 
that ' ‘The w'est coast of Canada and s Alaska is 
occupied by B. c. vancouverensis and B. c 
occidentalis There never was a subspecies B. 
c. vancouverensis until Hanson's second (2007) 
volume, where the name is proposed in such a 
way as to deliberately make it unavailable. 
The introduction concludes with a chapter-bv- 
chapter synopsis of how the author intends to 
support Hanson’s work and (page 10), “to put 
forward a mechanism that would explain the 
evolution ot the diversity of white-cheeked geese 
and to test this idea with reasonable samples .. 
from across the continent." I attempt to follow his 
outline and examine how well he succeeds, 
although it would be quicker to report the next 
several chapters reveal the current AOU subspe- 
cific taxonomy is not correct because those 
subspecies arc composed of smaller subpopulalions 
that are distinguishable from one another. It seems 
necessary to note that the tenn ‘AOU subspecies.' 
seemingly referring to the 1957 Check-list, the last 
to use subspecies, apparently means the allotment 
of subspecies to the species canadensis and 
hutchinsii when those taxa were split in the 2004 
Supplement , where subspecies of Delacour 1954 
were listed rather than those of AOU 1957 for the 
sake of a more complete listing of names. 
Chapter 2 explores the extent of variation 
within populations as background for later 
analyses of variation among populations. Because 
the word ‘population’ has been used in many 
different ways. Anderson prefers to use the term 
taxon (or ‘taxa’). defined (page 15) to equate it 
to subspecies, or occasionally to species. Sixteen 
color and pattern characters, seven measurements, 
and three ratios are defined, that are used in 
comparisons throughout the book. Plumage char¬ 
acters are evaluated for individual birds by scores 
of either 1-3 or 1-8. Table 2.2 gives the 
proportion (%/100) of birds w'ith each score for 
each character for either 3,408 (page 17) or 3.368 
(page 20) specimens in five species designated by 
Hanson. Curiously, the fact that 0.000 % of birds 
650 
