Doeboy wrote: "Are whitetails any less of an animal" than an elk?" In the sense I was talking about, they are in fact on average 3/4 less the animal. The distinction I was making had nothing to do with relative value of an animal's life, but physical size and toughtness and what sort of gear it takes to consistently penetrate and kill them humanely, even with a less-than-perfect shot. I've lived and hunted and guided elk country for nearly 30 years, and it's an unavoidable and far too obsdrvable a truth that All hunters consistently wound and lose way too many elk -- rifles, all types bows, and the worst are blackpowder. Some of this is because some people always shoot first and think later, if at all. but a major cause of the excessive wounding rate on elk by well-intended ethical hunters is optimism that the gear that works well for them on deer will "be enough" for elk as well. Too often, it is not. Consequently, to encourage such optimism is not only disrespectful to our prey, but leads to a lot of disappointment among hunters when they find out the heartbreaking way. Exceptions don't make a rule. If you examine the group of questions Frank asked about -- bow weight, long shooting distance, and a suggestion of light arrows (no mention of broadheads) -- and add them together, we do NOT have a high-odds gear setup for elk. Possible, of course. Something to encourage? No. The good news, even with our disagreements, is that at least we seriously discuss these things and those of us with concerns are allowed (for the most part)to air them for consideration. Meanwhile, the Moon Unit training-wheelers just go glumly along shooting 350-grain toothpics with frail mechanical heads at 300fps at almost any animal they see at any range. THAT is where the majority of elk wounding by bowhunters comes from, not from us.