Some of our smallest butterflies are among our prettiest, like this tiny Banded Hairstreak butterfly (Satyrium calanus) that I spotted on Tuesday at Jackson Miles Abbott Wetland Refuge. I always check out a patch of wildflowers in one corner of this small refuge and once again it paid dividends.
I was able to photograph this butterfly as it nectared on one of the many black-eyed susans that are now in bloom. Actually I am not entirely certain if these flowers are black-eyed susans, but they are the same shape and color and may be part of the larger rudbeckia flower family.
UPDATE: A friend of mine on Facebook who is more experienced than I am with butterflies tells me that this is probably a Gray Hairstreak butterfly (Strymon melinus), not a Banded Hairstreak. The difference is so subtle that I am not sure I can see it and certainly cannot explain it. At least the beauty is undeniable.
© Michael Q. Powell. All rights reserved.
Mike Powell 
Excellent!
Thanks, kenne.
Guess what? We have this kind of pretty little butterfly in Massachusetts where I live! When I made the photo the biggest I could see the curled up proboscis and the antennae hanging straight down. I like the two tails sticking out from both of the fuzzy hindwings and the orange spots. Thank you, Mr. Mike! Bye!
Thanks, Benjamin. The curled up proboscis was also the first thing that I noticed. I think we both really like to see the details in the shots that I take. Bye for now.
Nice Mike! Our posts today “banded” together!
Thanks, Reed. We were on the same wavelength, though I believe we shot different species. I think yours is a Red-banded Hairstreak (Calycopis cecrops), while mine is a Banded Hairstreak (Satyrium calanus). Your hairstreak has red stripes which are not present on mine.
Yikes. One of my friends on Facebook told me that my butterfly is probably a Gray Hairstreak, not a Banded Hairstreak. Identification is so problematic at times.
Nice capture, Mike! A non-flashy, but very elegant butterfly, nicely posed on the complementing black-eyed susan.
Thanks, Ellen. “Non-flashy, but very elegant”–what a great description of the little butterfly. I’d love to be described in those words, but I’m afraid that nobody has ever described me as “elegant.”
Me, either, Mike! 😁
This is an interesting little guy, Mike. I’ve never seen one.
They are only about an inch in size, so you have to look really close, Dan, to discover their beauty.
So pretty!
Thanks, Ariela.
What a beautiful and crisp portrait. These are favorites of mine, and I loved seeing them in our garden back in Omaha. I’ve included them in a couple of posts and I see that you commented on one, but not on this one: https://krikitarts.wordpress.com/2012/08/05/rare-peeks-at-hairstreaks/.
A hairstreak by any other name…:-) Some identifying marks can be so obscure. I’ve been told by some entomologists that there are species which can only be identified by genital dissection to which I reply I don’t want to know that badly.
I’m with you, Steve. I do like to try to identify what I have photographed, but I don’t really obsess over it. I know there are some dragonfly folks who net specimens to examine them and photograph them more closely. Paulsen tries to identify those types of specimens and in his guide they are shown with an indication of “posed.” (I ran across that recently when I was looking for the entry for the Tiger Spiketail.) If done properly, it is possible to net a specimen without hurting it, but it is also possible to wound or kill one, which is problematic when it is a low density species, as is often the case where I live. I personally will not net a dragonfly.