From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
Wisconsin hunters likely would be the first in the nation allowed to wear blaze pink instead of the traditional orange in the woods under a bill announced Wednesday by a Republican and a Democrat.If blaze pink is a safe option for hunters, then I have no problem with it.
State Reps. Joel Kleefisch (R-Oconomowoc) and Nick Milroy (D-South Range) said at a Capitol news conference they hoped the attire would encourage more Wisconsinites to hunt and appeal to women and new hunters.
"Wisconsin has historically had some of the highest participation rates in hunting... and we've seen a decrease in this number in recent years," Milroy said. "It's my hope that this will become universally acceptable and create revenue for some of these programs that we're talking about.
...Majid Sarmadi, a University of Wisconsin-Madison professor and textile expert, said his lab analysis of flourescent pink proved it had similar or better visibility to humans as blaze orange, and therefore would be just as safe for hunters to wear.
...Kleefisch said the real question is about the role of the state government.
"What we're doing is giving hunters another potential option," Kleefisch said. "We're getting government out of the way of a couple color choices that people use in the woods. The private sector's going to take over the rest."
However, I really don't think the introduction of pink attire is going to attract more women to hunting.
I doubt any woman stayed away from hunting because she didn't like blaze orange. Is a woman going to take up the sport because now she can wear blaze pink?
I agree with Kleefisch. Get the government out of the way.
Will this move make a significant difference in hunting participation?
I doubt it, though it does draw publicity and that might be a bit helpful in encouraging women to hunt.
Some men might be interested in wearing blaze pink, too.