<\/p>\n
DENVER \u2013 Kirstie Pike has hunted since her mid-20s, aiming at such things as mule deer and alligators. Her love for hunting led her to open a Gunnison-based business that specializes in field apparel for women.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe number of women in the hunting industry is the fastest growing demographic in all of hunting right now, and it has been since 2009,\u201d said Pike, president and chief executive of Pr\u00f3is Hunting and Field Apparel. \u201cIt\u2019s just going to continue to gain support. We\u2019re seeing more and more women hunting that really like the idea of providing food for themselves and their families. They like to get out in the outdoors. They like the sport.\u201d<\/p>\n
A state lawmaker from Vail, however, believes the sport can attract even more women. In an effort to drive that growth, she has proposed legislation that would add pink to a list of acceptable colors to wear when hunting.<\/p>\n
\u201cI went with pink because women and hunting is the only growth that we\u2019re seeing in the industry, and if pink gets a few more women hunting, it gives a couple small businesses in Colorado a leg up on having another product to offer,\u201d said Democratic Sen. Kerry Donovan, the sponsor of bipartisan Senate Bill 68.<\/p>\n
A hunter is required to wear fluorescent orange to hunt elk, deer, pronghorn, moose or black bear. The bill would add the option to wear fluorescent pink.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis is fun, but it\u2019s hunting, so we don\u2019t want to disregard safety,\u201d Donovan said.<\/p>\n
Donovan modeled the bill after a piece of legislation that is gaining traction in the Wisconsin Legislature.<\/p>\n
She plans to underscore testimony that came out during discussions in Wisconsin, where a hunting expert testified that bright pink, or \u201cblaze\u201d pink, would be just as visible as bright orange.<\/p>\n
The Senate Agriculture, Natural Resources and Energy Committee is expected to hear the Colorado measure in committee on Thursday.<\/p>\n
But some women in the hunting apparel business say the move is patronizing. They underscore that growth in female hunting has spiked without pink being an allowed color.<\/p>\n
\u201cI\u2019m lost on the idea that pink has to be the color that identifies an outdoors woman anymore than blaze orange,\u201d Pike said. \u201cPersonally, I think it\u2019s kind of ridiculous.\u201d<\/p>\n
Pike\u2019s business would stand to gain new apparel lines as a result of Donovan\u2019s legislation, which could translate to additional profits. But Pike said she doubts she would even head in that direction.<\/p>\n
\u201cThere\u2019s a lot of women who really dislike the whole pink thing. They think the look is kind of condescending,\u201d Pike added. \u201cWhy does this have to be the mindset? Men don\u2019t have to wear blue to be identified as men.\u201d<\/p>\n
Jane Gustafson, the owner of Durango-based Goods for the Woods, an outdoor gear store, added: \u201cI don\u2019t think orange is stopping a female from hunting at all. That\u2019s a silly concept.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt would just make me have more inventory,\u201d Gustafson added of the bill. \u201cIt\u2019s not necessary. Orange is just fine. There\u2019s no reason to redo the wheel.\u201d<\/p>\n
Donovan responded that her intention is not to oversimplify the subject.<\/p>\n
\u201cI would never say that just providing a new color will make someone do any activity or event,\u201d she said. \u201cBut providing more options, giving it a little bit more fun, I think is worthwhile.\u201d<\/p>\n
She equated the issue to breast cancer research advocates using pink to rally support.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe\u2019ve moved beyond the oversimplification of gender and colors, but this just gives some options,\u201d Donovan said. \u201cIf you want to wear it and it makes it more fun for you, then great. If it\u2019s not your thing, then you still have orange.\u201d<\/p>\n