Jump to content
  • GUESTS

    If you want access to members only forums on HSO, you will gain access only when you Sign-in or Sign-Up .

    This box will disappear once you are signed in as a member. ?

Blaze Pink?


Recommended Posts

No offense to our fine neighbors to the East, but am I the only one that finds this dumb? I'm all for getting people involved in deer hunting, but I can't imagine that having to wear blaze orange instead of blaze pink was holding anyone back from hunting who wanted to get into the sport:

http://www.startribune.com/legislator-preparing-to-unveil-bill-legalizing-blaze-pink/304718311/

Wisconsin hunters could wear blaze pink in the woods under bill aimed at encouraging women

By TODD RICHMOND Associated Press

May 22, 2015 — 12:55pm

MADISON, Wis. — Real men — and women — could wear pink in Wisconsin's woods if a group of lawmakers get their way.

A bipartisan group of legislators calling themselves the sportsmen's caucus is preparing to unveil a bill next week that would legalize blaze pink for deer hunters. The group has scheduled a news conference Tuesday at the state Capitol to announce the measure.

Sen. Terry Moulton, a member of the sportsmen's caucus, wrote in a column published in the Dunn County News that the blaze pink bill is designed to encourage women to become hunters and keep them involved in the sport.

The caucus has released no other details on the measure. The bill's lead author, Rep. Nick Milroy, a South Range Democrat, was vacationing in the Boundary Waters on Friday and couldn't be reached for comment, his aide, Mary Lou Keleher, said.

Under current state law, no one can hunt anything except waterfowl during a gun deer season unless at least half of each article of clothing worn above the waist, such as jacket or a hat, is colored blaze orange. Violators face a $10 forfeiture.

According to state Department of Natural Resources data, female hunters made up about 10 percent of the state's gun deer hunters in 2014, 2013 and 2012. They made up about a quarter of hunters between ages 10 and 12 in 2014, however.

DNR spokesman Bill Cosh declined to comment on the bill.

Jeff Schinkten, president of Whitetails Unlimited, a national nonprofit organization that works to improve deer hunting and deer environments, said he'd never heard of legalizing blaze pink. He said he likes the idea of trying to encourage more women to become hunters but he's worried the color isn't as visible as blaze orange and could lead to shooting accidents.

"Where is this coming from?" Schinkten said. "A guy in blaze orange sticks out like a sore thumb. If blaze pink does the same thing, great. I like the idea that we're catering to the women to get them into the sport ... but I'm more about safety than fashion."

Moulton wrote in his column that the sportsmen's caucus met with Majid Sarmadi, a textiles expert at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He said Sarmadi conducted experiments on blaze pink and blaze orange visibility and concluded that blaze pink clothing is equally visible or more visible to the human eye than blaze orange.

Moulton did not explain Sarmadi's metholodogy in the column. His aide referred questions Friday to Milroy's office but Keleher said she couldn't talk about the bill.

Sarmadi did not immediately return voicemail or email messages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't imagine that having to wear blaze orange instead of blaze pink was holding anyone back from hunting who wanted to get into the sport:

I can't either, but I know from walking through the outdoor stores that there is more and more blaze pink merchandise on the market, so why not let the gals wear it in the field if it accomplishes the same goal in increasing visibility as blaze orange?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I support this one. It was probably around 20 years ago that I saw an article in one of the outdoor mags that talked about blaze pink being the perfect color for deer hunting. Visible to humans and just another shade of gray to deer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with bobbymalone, (Maybe for the 1st time) but find it disturbing that the legislators don't have anything more important to do with their time.

It's disturbing that the legislators are even the ones that are supposed to make these rules. This sort of stuff should be handled by the DNR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am gonna go out on a limb NoWiser and say the answer to your question is without a doubt a YES!!!!  Even if not to your face, behind your back they would be laughing!! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now ↓↓↓ or ask your question and then register. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.