GR8atta2d seemed to sum it up very well. What bothered me about the signature was that it presumed the archer was interested in only the long shot and that somehow he might be uncabable of making, or even trying to set up a perfect shot on close game.
I agree that distance has nothing to do with it. To me, an archer is someone who has taken to the bow and shows some dedication to mastering it or at least striving to improve. I would hope all bowhunters would be archers.
I think that since coming from a recurve beginning, I may identify more with the term archer, because I doubt there would be much arguement that shooting barebow with a slower recurve takes some dedication to achieve a competent level of repepitive accuracy and confidence. It may be possible that compounds with sights, releases, drop aways and peeps are much, much easier to shoot and kill deer with within days or weeks of purchase. The average recurve/longbow hunter may spend a year or more before he feels the same level of confidence. Then, he must connect with a good shoot to build that confidence.
That is why I think "archer" may be dearer to the barebow shooter and I think in the world of compounds the term has changed to competitive shooter. Now I may get some flac from that assumption from distinguished compound archers... lol.