What are the chances of seeing a Malabar Whistling-Thrush in Eravikulam National Park?
Likely
About 50% of wildlife watchers report a Malabar Whistling-Thrush sighting in Eravikulam National Park on a given day, based on 226 verified sightings from GBIF citizen-science data from 2019 to 2026. It is the 11th most-seen of the 116 birds we can rate there. Over three days the chance rises to about 90%, and over a week to over 90%, if each day is a fresh chance.
When is the best time to see a Malabar Whistling-Thrush in Eravikulam National Park?
January and August
In those months about 60% of wildlife watchers report a Malabar Whistling-Thrush in Eravikulam National Park on a given day, against about 30% in March, the lowest month.
What time of day is best to see a Malabar Whistling-Thrush?
Between 3 and 6 am
Across all the parks we cover, that three-hour window holds the most Malabar Whistling-Thrush sightings with a recorded time, and about 6 in 10 of them come between 6 am and 6 pm: it is most active around dawn and dusk.
Is Eravikulam National Park the best place to see a Malabar Whistling-Thrush?
2nd of 8
Of the 8 parks where we can rate Malabar Whistling-Thrush sightings, Eravikulam National Park ranks 2nd at about 50%. The best odds are in Periyar National Park (India, about 60%).
Which relatives of the Malabar Whistling-Thrush live in Eravikulam National Park?
Same family: Muscicapidae
The closest relatives of the Malabar Whistling-Thrush that you can see in Eravikulam National Park (family Muscicapidae, Old World Flycatchers, Robins, and Chats) are Pied Bushchat (about 70%), White-bellied Blue Robin (about 70%) and Nilgiri Flycatcher (about 60%), with each one's daily chance of a sighting.
Where does the Malabar Whistling-Thrush sighting chance come from?
GBIF citizen-science records
It is estimated from how often the Malabar Whistling-Thrush is recorded against all the birds logged in Eravikulam National Park (226 verified sightings from 2019 to 2026), calibrated against known sighting rates. Figures are rounded to the nearest 10% because citizen-science data supports honest approximations, not decimals, and months with records from fewer than five people show "—". How it works.