Thrushes, all different. April 2024 Florida. Sorry for back of camera photos but please ID if possible (1 Viewer)

[goawildlifeenthusiast]

Agree - and the first appears to be a Swainson's to me as well. Buffy spectacles appear to be somewhat obscured by the harsh lighting, but are still visible.

5th shows no spectacle (poor pic tho), but you agree with 6 as gray cheeked? because Im getting so many conflicted views now, from experienced birders from florida. This is giving me headache.

 

[raymie]

5th shows no spectacle (poor pic tho), but you agree with 6 as gray cheeked? because Im getting so many conflicted views now, from experienced birders from florida. This is giving me headache.

I see buffy spectacles on 5.

Yes, the spotted Catharus are a pretty difficult group.

 

[Rapala]

5th shows no spectacle (poor pic tho), but you agree with 6 as gray cheeked? because Im getting so many conflicted views now, from experienced birders from florida. This is giving me headache.

Yes, I agree with 6 as GCTH. The bird in 6 lacks buffy spectacles, and has a distinct grayish patch in front of the eye. Grayer/cooler tones throughout the face and breast and extensive yellow on the lower mandible are less diagnostic, but still supportive, features for GCTH. I've had hundreds of SWTH and GCTH in-hand for banding, and would have no problem calling 6 a GCTH.

 

[njlarsen]

I think five has just as much of an eye ring as three, and the branch is hiding the area of the supraloral (above the line from eye to bill).
Niels

 

[nartreb]

Eye ring brightness can be quite difficult to judge, both in person and in photos. It really depends how the light hits them. I try to distinguish Swainson's from grey-cheeked by color - mostly lores but also cheek/mustachial pale areas. I would lean toward swainson for #2 = -2809.png and maybe #4 = -8010.png; I'd be pretty confident in grey-cheeked for #6 = -947.png and #3 = -305.png, and I'd guess grey-cheeked for #5 = -154.png. #1 = 0689.png is too hard to tell in that light, and #4 is pretty hard too.

 

[goawildlifeenthusiast]

Eye ring brightness can be quite difficult to judge, both in person and in photos. It really depends how the light hits them. I try to distinguish Swainson's from grey-cheeked by color - mostly lores but also cheek/mustachial pale areas. I would lean toward swainson for #2 = -2809.png and maybe #4 = -8010.png; I'd be pretty confident in grey-cheeked for #6 = -947.png and #3 = -305.png, and I'd guess grey-cheeked for #5 = -154.png. #1 = 0689.png is too hard to tell in that light, and #4 is pretty hard too.

I think five has just as much of an eye ring as three, and the branch is hiding the area of the supraloral (above the line from eye to bill).
Niels

Yes, I agree with 6 as GCTH. The bird in 6 lacks buffy spectacles, and has a distinct grayish patch in front of the eye. Grayer/cooler tones throughout the face and breast and extensive yellow on the lower mandible are less diagnostic, but still supportive, features for GCTH. I've had hundreds of SWTH and GCTH in-hand for banding, and would have no problem calling 6 a GCTH.

As long as 1 of them is gcth it’s all good. I have a personal rule of not adding a bird to my life list unless I get a photo and I had a very good birder say that his opinion on 6 is Swainson’s