Apologies if a similar conversation has been had, but a few searches pulled up nothing.
In the case of an observation photo being detailed enough to know it is one of two species (Species A or B), but the evidence for which of the two is only available via text in the description box, not in the photo, how should this be handled? Should we only ID to the level that is visible in the photos (Genus A), or trust the observer when they say the significant defining feature (visible in person but not in the photo) marks them as Species A?
It seems to me if the observer is well-acquainted enough with the taxa to describe the significant defining feature, they will have accurately reported their in-person observation. This seems comparable to ‘trusting’ descriptions that say ‘the call was definitely X’ or ‘the flight pattern/behaviour was definitely Y’
I know this type of question generally ends with the answer ‘ID to the level you are comfortable with’ but am wondering if there is more of a hardline stance on this or at least a sort of consensus