Strymon acaciae
In 3 days ~40% in a week ~70%
| # | Park | Country | Daily sighting probability |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Vanoise National Park | 🇫🇷 France | |
| 2 | Ecrins National Park | 🇫🇷 France | |
| 3 | Aigüestortes National Park | 🇪🇸 Spain | |
| 4 | Cévennes National Park | 🇫🇷 France | |
| 5 | Sierra de Guadarrama National Park | 🇪🇸 Spain | |
| 6 | Pyrénées National Park | 🇫🇷 France |
| # | City | Country | Daily sighting probability |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Prague | 🇨🇿 Czechia |
With luck
About 10% of wildlife watchers report a Sloe Hairstreak sighting in Vanoise National Park on a given day, based on 11 verified sightings from GBIF citizen-science data from 2019 to 2026. It is the 132nd most-seen of the 308 insects we can rate there. Over three days the chance rises to about 40%, and over a week to about 70%, if each day is a fresh chance.
August
In that month about 30% of wildlife watchers report a Sloe Hairstreak in Vanoise National Park on a given day, against under 5% in July and September–May, the lowest months.
Between 11 am and 2 pm
Across all the parks we cover, that three-hour window holds the most Sloe Hairstreak sightings with a recorded time, and about 9 in 10 of them come between 6 am and 6 pm: it is a daytime animal.
Yes
Of the 6 parks where we can rate Sloe Hairstreak sightings, Vanoise National Park has the highest daily chance: about 10%. Next come Ecrins National Park (France, about 10%) and Aigüestortes National Park (Spain, about 10%).
Same family: Lycaenidae
The closest relatives of the Sloe Hairstreak that you can see in Vanoise National Park (family Lycaenidae, Gossamer-winged Butterflies) are Scarce Copper (about 40%), Damon Blue (about 40%) and Chalkhill Blue (about 40%), with each one's daily chance of a sighting.
GBIF citizen-science records
It is estimated from how often the Sloe Hairstreak is recorded against all the insects logged in Vanoise National Park (11 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.
