Backtags - Spring Hearings

Please help me understand why removing the need for a backtag was defeated this year? I understand that only 2 states require backtags including WI. Why did people vote against it? They are a pain to deal with, ruin clothes, and cost the state a lot of money with all the backtag material and printing fees.

you can read a tresspassers number no problem, if youve got a good scope on your deer rifle that is

To be legal I would need to have it on my backpack as I walk in the woods and leave it on as I climb the ladder into my stand, then when I get in my stand I would need to take off my pack pack and my jacket to put the tag on my jacket. During this time I would not be able to have my safety vest on so it's a serious safety issue. For those who say it's to catch tresappsers the numbers are so small now that you need to be right on top of the person to read the number. If you're going to use the Vang case as a reason to keep them then I would assume you also use the Sandy Hook incenedent to outlaw guns since if it happened once we should act irrationally so it never happens again right?

Not reading the entire thread but in Pennsylvania you need to or at least you used to need to where your fishing license on your hat so a warden can see it. I thought that was crazy but never had an issue with the Backtag.

I see people hang their backtags on their backpack also, and then hang their backpack in a tree in their stand. I believe that is technically illegal. If you look at the hunting regs, the backtag shall be displayed in the center of the hunter's back. The whole idea is stupid. Should Walmart require everybody that enters the store to wear a backtag to thwart retail theft?

I know a guy who puts his backtag on his backpack. When he's walking in, it's visible. When he's in his treestand, he hangs it so it's visible. That way, no noise against the tree. The same guy has hunted without a backtag (forgot it at home). Called the DNR, reported it lost (so he was on record). Next time in town, went to the Registration Station and bought a replacement. All this being said, we both (the guy I was talking about and myself) have hunted in other States where backtags are not needed. No big deal one way or the other.

if it's for easier identification,then we should wear a plate on the front also

I fall in the 'don't care' category. They have never bothered me. On my camo clothes I had the wife sew on a small camo fabric loop to put it through, my orange clothes had a loop already to use. My only complaint I guess would be if I lean back against a tree and it makes a noise. Better than having more licenses and tags stuffed in my wallet though. When I have all my waterfowl, small game, turkey, fishing, etc in there already, just adding deer tags would make it worse. The treestand thing should be like duck blinds. You can put them out but they are first come, first serve.

only convicted violators should be required to wear them,after all there the ones who need to be watched,

I had no idea that backtags will help stop massacres in the woods. I had no idea they have that much power. It was asked why they are a PITA, here are some reasons that I don't like them: 1) If you lose your backtag on brush, you are at risk of a fine. 2) If you lose your backtag on brush, you have to buy a replacement. 3) Puts holes in my clothes, and has torn my jackets when getting caught on brush or on my treestand on my back. 4) Makes noise on the tree when I lean against it. 5) If you forget it at home or in your car, you can't hunt 6) Have to switch the tag back and forth between garments, which can lead to forgeting it 7) Costs the state, ie. all of us, a lot of money for arguably no value in return Is this honestly worth the hassle? To me, this getting voted down also shows how stubborn and short sighted WI hunters are. MN, MI, and Illinois all don't require backtags, yet as usual, WI lags behind.

igor, the story goes he wrote it in the dust on the 4 wheeler not blood. but that was one incident. I knew one of the deceased from that masacre and it is a shame what happend. most states have done away with them. why can't we. why not have fisherman, small game hunters, duck hunters, trappers, or any other hunter partaking in a hunting activity have to wear a back tag? there is no real need for them. if a warden sees you with a gun or a bow, he knows your hunting. no need to turn around to show them a tag. it would be nice to open a wallet and show a warden a license just like fishing.

Ive had good luck with the shawano sherrif and tresspassing complaints. .....some guys love them and others hate them...I guess I'm just in the group who finds them to be useless.

why is not allowing stands up overnight common sense? the danger for me setting up tree stands in the dark doubles compare to me doing it during daylight. I can see maybe not allowing it during the gun season do to the amount of hunters but bow season the amount of hunters is very small compare to the land available.

Keep in mind one other reason to have the backtag. Remember the Clark county shootings in '04? One of the victims wrote down the backtag #, in his own blood, of Chai Vang which helped apprehend him when he came out of the woods later that day. Secondly, why are people referring to it being such a PITA? Really? Is it that tough? I hunt as hard or harder than most and I have no problem with it. Why is it such a pain?????????????

JC, I agree with some of your comments, but you couldn't be further from the truth on some of your other assumptions. "the disallowing of stand placement overnight on state land (fueled by tree huggers and the pro wolf crowd)", Really? I think this was fueled by common sense.

I have no idea what is going on here. Anyway, to deter trespassing? Do you think trespassers are worried if they have their backtag on? It is like posting a "no guns allowed" sign on the front of a business, and expecting criminals to follow the law. There are a lot of small game hunters and coyote hunters that trespass all over the place near me. Should they also require backtags? Maybe we all should get tatoos on our foreheads of our full legal name and date of birth. I also agree that the hearing votes are useless at best. The other issues I have at the hearings were the vote down of trolling again (fueled by a few muskie guides and their buddies), the disallowing of stand placement overnight on state land (fueled by tree huggers and the pro wolf crowd), and the failure of allowing dogs to hunt wolves (fueled by the tree huggers and pro wolf crowd). The issue is these hearings attract emotional and liberal groups who give a concerted effort to attend the hearings. I believe these votes are not representative of sportsmen or sportswomen. To fix the problem, I would say that only those that had a DNR customer number should only be allowed to vote. Votes should also only be allowed for those that know something about the sport. If I didn't buy a bobcat tag, why am I voting on bobcat regulations I know nothing about? The right to vote should be allowed only if you partake in the sport you are voting on. The hearings questions should also be made available online with one submission allowed per person. Expecting the public to be able to attend the one night hearing in one location in a county is not going to attract wide audiences.