FLYMPH FORUM

A topic on another board about Dave Whitlock's Red Fox Squirrel Nymph got me thinking - in your opinion, would this fly qualify as a flymph? It's one of my favorites. I know whether it is or it isn't makes no difference, but I was curious on your thoughts.

Joe

I would say no, it's a nymph. However, with the addition of a partridge hackle.....

Hi, scotfly

Almost all of the recipes for it that I've seen (Whitlock's original, included) have a couple of wraps of partridge or hen hackle as a collar. I know I always tie it with a hackle collar.

Joe

When weighted, no, it would be a nymph. Unweighted I would categorize it as a soft hackle, but not a flymph. Hidy was pretty particular in his definition of a flymph in the opening to "Fishing the Flymph" section of The Art of Tying the Wet Fly and Fishing the Flymph.

Hi Joe, the dressing I know has no hackle. But; a quick Google shows I'm wrong (no surprises there! )
So answering again, this time from an educated stand-point. In the spirit of the dressing I'd still say no, but in the style of the dressing a definite possibly.

The problem, here is, like any good pattern, it has been "tweaked" by different tiers. That makes it difficult to discern. If I recall correctly, this was tied as the Red Squirrel Nymph, originally, without the hackle collar. I'm sure someone added this feature. I agree with Carl about the weight. It could be construed as a "soft-hackled nymph" much like those found in Allen McGee's book. Without the weight or bead, and with a full wrapped collar, it'd be a soft-hackle or wingless wet. IF, however, the tier "tweaked" the pattern again, it could be tied as a flymph.

Mark

As tied by Dave Whitlock: http://www.flymartonline.com/modules.ph ... ws&sid=295

dd

dd,
Perhaps Dave, himself changed the tying of this fly, but for some reason, I do not recall it being tied, originally, like that photo shows. It was tied more nymph style, more like a good old Hare's Ear nymph.

Mark

After doing a bit of searching it appears that Mr. Whitlock ties this pattern a number of different ways. Here is a sample from an article by Dave published in July 1998 edition of Fly Fisherman. This is a Whitlock illustration. It is pretty much the way I remember seeing it when he first publicized the pattern
As you can see, the nymph is tied as such. I have seen other illustrations in various articles where the nymph is tied with a partridge hackle beard and as the photo in that link daring duffer posted. So apparently, he ties it differently for different usages. I would still not consider the hackled version a full flymph, although it is pretty close.

Mark

Added: He also ties it with a bead head, and a bead head with rubber legs.

Added: He also ties it with a bead head, and a bead head with rubber legs.

Shame on him! Not very cultivated. The illustration in your post is quite nice.

Variation on a theme can't be wrong if the theme is right.

Your memory serves you well, Mark. Congratulations.

dd