What are the chances of seeing a Pale Babul Blue in Bwindi Impenetrable National Park?
With luck
About 10% of wildlife watchers report a Pale Babul Blue sighting in Bwindi Impenetrable National Park on a given day, based on 5 verified sightings from GBIF citizen-science data from 2019 to 2026. It is the 28th most-seen of the 38 insects we can rate there. Over three days the chance rises to about 30%, and over a week to about 60%, if each day is a fresh chance.
When is the best time to see a Pale Babul Blue in Bwindi Impenetrable National Park?
May
In that month about 30% of wildlife watchers report a Pale Babul Blue in Bwindi Impenetrable National Park on a given day, against under 5% in April and August–February, the lowest months.
What time of day is best to see a Pale Babul Blue?
Between 11 am and 2 pm
Across all the parks we cover, that three-hour window holds the most Pale Babul Blue sightings with a recorded time, and nearly all of them come between 6 am and 6 pm: it is a daytime animal.
Is Bwindi Impenetrable National Park the best place to see a Pale Babul Blue?
2nd of 3
Of the 3 parks where we can rate Pale Babul Blue sightings, Bwindi Impenetrable National Park ranks 2nd at about 10%. The best odds are in Odzala-Kokoua National Park (Republic of the Congo, about 20%).
Which relatives of the Pale Babul Blue live in Bwindi Impenetrable National Park?
Same family: Lycaenidae
The closest relatives of the Pale Babul Blue that you can see in Bwindi Impenetrable National Park (family Lycaenidae, Gossamer-winged Butterflies) are Castalius margaritaceus (about 20%), Forest Hairtail (about 20%) and Uranothauma falkensteini (about 20%), with each one's daily chance of a sighting.
Where does the Pale Babul Blue sighting chance come from?
GBIF citizen-science records
It is estimated from how often the Pale Babul Blue is recorded against all the insects logged in Bwindi Impenetrable National Park (5 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.