Any Chance This Is Gray-cheeked Thrush? (1 Viewer)

[steveb108]

I saw several thrushes today that looked like Hermits or maybe Gray-cheekeds. I didn't get a good look at the tails. In the last 2 weeks Swainson's and Veerys passed through, but I don't believe this one is either. Seen in Maryland.

As always your thoughts are warmly appreciated.

 

[qwerty5]

Looks good for Gray-cheeked

 

[rkj]

Yes there is a chance it is a Gray-cheeked Thrush, though it is probably impossible to rule out Bicknell's Thrush.

 

[KC Foggin]

Gray-cheeked Thrush looks good to me ;}

 

[qwerty5]

though it is probably impossible to rule out Bicknell's Thrush.

But the probability of Bicknell's is very low, and we don't have any reason to suspect it, so in my mind it's fine to call it a Gray-cheeked.

 

[howiewu]

I think this is a very nice capture of a Gray-cheeked Thrush!

Howard

 

[Butty]

No-one has said why?

 

[nartreb]

It's... grey in the cheeks, and overall. (Not buffy in the face, like Swainson's). Eye ring is not very bright (makes Hermit unlikely) and there's no hint of rust in the wings or what we can see of the tail (making Hermit very unlikely). Overall color, breast spots, etc etc rule out veery, wood thrush... Bicknell's isn't really distinguishable by plumage, but tends to be a little browner. I'm not sure Qwerty says Bicknell's is unlikely. Maryland is in the migration zone for both. Maybe it's a question of migration timing?

 

[qwerty5]

I'm not sure Qwerty says Bicknell's is unlikely. Maryland is in the migration zone for both. Maybe it's a question of migration timing?

I said that because Bicknell's is very rare on migration anywhere and anytime.

 

[steveb108]

Thanks, all, for your valued input. And thanks, nartreb, for the detailed analysis. It's a lifer, so you all contributed to making me a happy birder/photog!

 

[Butty]

thanks, nartreb, for the detailed analysis

It makes so much difference when someone goes to the trouble to do that - especially when difficult species and/or particularly problematic IDs are involved. I do wish that more (especially the more-knowledgeable) people on here would do that more often than they do - rather than merely the sterile statement of a species name from which no-one learns much.

 

[Andy Adcock]

It's... grey in the cheeks, and overall. (Not buffy in the face, like Swainson's). Eye ring is not very bright (makes Hermit unlikely) and there's no hint of rust in the wings or what we can see of the tail (making Hermit very unlikely). Overall color, breast spots, etc etc rule out veery, wood thrush... Bicknell's isn't really distinguishable by plumage, but tends to be a little browner. I'm not sure Qwerty says Bicknell's is unlikely. Maryland is in the migration zone for both. Maybe it's a question of migration timing?

Really, I don't see that at all and in my mind, I immediately thought 'why not Bicknell's'?

 

[nartreb]

No particular reason why not Bicknell's except that Bicknell's is less common. Bicknell's was long considered a subspecies of grey-cheeked and is very hard to distinguish in photos. (My guide talks about a "buffy wash" on the breast of Bicknell's, but I don't see that on most photos of Bicknell's. Similarly, there's mention that Bicknell's has more yellow on the lower bill than grey-cheeked, but I usually can't see any difference.)

I'm rather confused how you can immediately think of Bicknell's, but "not see at all" that it's "grey in the cheeks and overall", just like a Bicknell's thrush.

 

[Larry Sweetland]

Does anyone actually know for sure how rare Bicknell's Thrush is at the location at this time of year, or is it all assumption based on minimal current knowledge (which itself might be based on people recording all their Gray-cheeked/Bicknell's Thrushes as Gray-cheeked by default ? 🤷

 

[nartreb]

Estimates are that gray-cheeked total population is about 2,000 times as large as Bicknell's. That's spread across much more of North America, but even if only 10% of grey-cheeked pass over Maryland, you'd expect at least a 200:1 ratio of gray-cheeked to Bicknells.
Ebird observational data for peak late-september migration in Maryland is 450:1 (ignoring undecided ["bicknell's/gray-cheek"] observations. We'd get 42:1 if we counted all undecided observations as Bicknells) . It does seem likely to me that the Maryland ebird data are based on assumptions, otherwise I'd expect vastly more undecideds. (Do they sing a lot while migrating through Maryland?) But this looks like a case where the assumptions are right more often than not.

 

[Andy Adcock]

I'm rather confused how you can immediately think of Bicknell's, but "not see at all" that it's "grey in the cheeks and overall", just like a Bicknell's thrush.

You must be confused if you think the cheeks are grey, compare with the flanks which ARE.

Anyway, Cornell is possibly not alone in concluding that they are only, reliably, distinguishable, vocally.

 

[rkj]

You must be confused if you think the cheeks are grey, compare with the flanks which ARE.

If the cheeks are not a pure, cold gray, they are still surely more gray than on any North American Catharus thrush except Gray-cheeked Thrush or perhaps Bicknell's Thrush.

 

[AveryBartels]

There is some suggestion that Bicknell's, at least from the more southerly breeding populations, make their full migration in one flight so wouldn't be stopping over anywhere, ergo no sightings during migration. Undoubtedly, the vast majority of (the relatively few) ones that DO get spotted get passed off as Gray-cheeked though.

 

[01101001]

So, on the one hand, it is not identifiable on visuals alone?

Because, on the other hand,

Both song and call overlap completely with Gray-cheeked.

(source: https://ebird.org/species/bicthr)

Interesting species pair. 🧐🤔