— A few weeks ago I wrote a column suggesting that the Maryland Fisheries Service was considering a regulation that would require trout anglers to pick only one type of bait or lure or fly with which to fish.

I made that up. I know at least one person took it seriously, so I imagine others did as well.

My managing editor, Jan Alderton, has told me in the past that when I get goofy to let readers know I am getting goofy. In other words, I should have put something in my tagline (that’s the little italicized sentence at the end of the article that lets you know how to contact me) like “I got goofy in this column” or “don’t take this seriously because I was just getting goofy” or “goofy is as goofy does.”

I have always known Jan was smarter than me. This proves it.

OK. I won’t need a goofy tagline with this one because I will tell your right up front that I AM NOT MAKING THIS UP.

As part of an online forum at The New York Times, a number of people are proposing that fly fishermen use flies that are not attached to a hook. They say this would still allow the angler the pleasure of fooling a trout into striking the artificial bug, but would not impale and hurt the fish. They say too it would not result in the fish becoming tired from the fight that would ensue when a real hook is used.

REPEAT, I AM NOT MAKING THIS UP

There is some pretty interesting stuff at this forum about catching trout and either keeping or releasing them. The discussion begins with brief essays from people who are believed to have some sort of expertise in the particular field.

For example, James Babb, the editor of Gray’s Sporting Journal, writes “Over the past 50 years, catch-and-release fishing has morphed from effete pinko plot to sound conservation practice to religious dogma. Even here in Maine, an angler admitting that he still enjoys frying a few spring trout risks excommunication from certain fly-fishing sects.”

Babb also writes “It may be comforting in some circles to claim that modern catch-and-release fishing isn’t truly a bloodsport, but the facts don’t follow. Studies of release mortality range from around 4 percent to well past 40 percent.”

Chris Hunt of Trout Unlimited writes, “In some rivers and streams, harvesting fish is a good idea, and releasing certain trout should be frowned upon. On streams like the South Fork (of the Snake River), which represents some of the last big-water habitat for Yellowstone cutthroats within their native range, non-native fish — particularly those that challenge the genetic integrity of the native fish — ought to be clubbed on the head and taken home for the grill whenever they’re caught.”

Hunt states as well that “... consider knocking every brook trout you catch in Western waters over the head, too. Brookies, native to Appalachia, have pushed native cutthroats out of many of their historic headwater habitats.”

Dylan Tomine, Patagonia fly fishing ambassador, wrote, “I have friends who’ve landed thousands of trout and literally have no idea what they taste like.”

And this, “In the fragile, coldwater species — trout, salmon, steelhead — commonly targeted by fly anglers, the incidental mortality rate for released fish can range from 5 percent to 10 percent. So who has a greater impact on the resource — the fly angler who releases 50 trout and keeps fishing, or the meat fisherman who kills two for dinner and quits? Who holds the moral high ground here?”

Lynne Sneddon is with the University of Liverpool. “Pain perception has been demonstrated in a variety of fish, including trout, salmon, zebrafish, carp and goldfish. So it is possible that the tissue damage caused by hooking does indeed give rise to the sensation of pain and possible suffering.

“It would be more humane to kill the fish quickly after capture and use it for food. If you accept that fish perceive pain, then you are causing unnecessary pain to an animal for human recreation and enjoyment. In Germany, for instance, catch-and-release for sport is illegal, and fish are only caught as a food source.”

James Rose, University of Wyoming: “The survival rate of fish released by anglers has been intensively studied and findings clearly show that with proper handling, even fish caught with bait, not just flies with barbless hooks, survive at a rate typically above 90 percent. But, in order to ensure high survival rates, anglers must avoid playing fish to exhaustion, limit time out of water, cut off rather than extract swallowed hooks and avoid fishing for temperature-sensitive species, like trout, when waters are too warm.”

So then the readers of the The New York Times then get their 2 cents worth by commenting, anonymously of course. My take is that the members of the ARF (Animal Righteous Folks) who comment are more PO’d with those who catch and release fish than with those who catch and eat them.

Here are a couple or four reader comments. You can catch them all at www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate.

Kent from Montana: “Fish with hookless lures (Venture Capitalists!: a whole new industry of developing flies so lifelike that a fish will hang onto them for a while) and incorporate POV HD video cameras on headgear. When the skill of a fisherman induces a fish to rise and strike, that’s a celebration of the fisherman’s skill and the fish’s essential fishness. When he’s hooked with unbending steel and dragged to the shore that’s abusive, unless the point is to eat the fish.”

Chris from Ottawa: “According to my erstwhile fishing partner... my excursions in a canoe to catch a 2 lb. bass for the table would constitute a conservation sin, while his noodling around for days propelled by a dirty old 2-stroke engine, armed with fish-finding electronics, a quiver of specialize rods,reels, and lures, playing fish until their blood lactate levels were elevated to extreme levels and ripping the cartilage around their mouths was considered the height of good practice. Bizarre.”

Michael S. of Wappingers Falls, N.Y.: “I personally think that anyone who fishes (or hunts for that matter) and doesn't eat his prey is immoral.”

Fly Guy of New York: “I’m a catch and release fisherman. I guess that makes me mean, cruel and inhumane despite my barbless hooks, minimal handling, no photo releases. Better I guess if I killed my catch, a one or two trout daily limit.

“Although, if I did that I would likely stop fishing because I often will catch my limit in the first few minutes of an evening spent fishing a mayfly rise, mostly because the streams I fish have healthy populations of wild trout.”

Contact Outdoor Editor Mike Sawyers at msawyers@times-news.com. He was not being goofy in this column.