John, I am with the rest here and having taken bear, elk and moose with archery equipment it is both acceptable and effective! All but one arrowed animal expired in short time and yardage of the shot(certainly no further than many of my rifle shots have taken). The one animal(which was a wt buck) mustered a good run but it was aided by inability to sit and wait after the shot I bumped him twice, while the shot wasn't perfect I have absolute confidence had I hung tight for a few extra minutes he would have expired where he first bedded down less the 100 yards from the shot sight. One must remember they kill by way of 2 different methods, a bullet uses shock to take the animal down which they then die from the wound, while a bow is by the wound itself as very little shock is released in the animal. Two different method but the same result. Some even argue a bow n' arrow causes less suffering as the animal just lays down and expires with no real pain or feelings of brick the wall when a bullet is forced into the body cavity causing extreme shock and energy release in it's target.

The distance an animal can be taken with either bow or rifle is in the hands of the user and his equipment. While a CF maybe able to shoot over a mile it certainly isn't considered acceptable for harvesting game at that range. I guess in short both are capable of harvesting game at much further distances than the shooter behind them thus making this portion of your question subjective and impossible to accurately answer. It also should have no bearing on what is deemed an acceptable tool for hunting purposes.

"They" need some education on archery equipment. I am sure they know abroginals had little troubles filling the meat pole with a stick/string and shaped rock. As with the change in technology and time advancement to both gun and archery equipment has made things possible that wouldn't be considered a reality years back. It seem unacceptable to me those would embrace one technology (such as the new Cf's of todays hunting world) but yet shun archery equipment which has made similar strides and all fairness has been a proven way to harvest animals for many more years than a bullet. I am sure it may come from the anti hunting and animal groups trying there best to play God and protect the ones who can't speak back. Officials throw the whiners a bone in hopes they will be appeased for a small period of time and never go back at look at the facts. Or maybe it is just b/c we have more bowhunters and therefore our voice is louder forcing them to re-examine the data.

In any regards it is bull as I have seen more poor shot animals which led to suffering by a rifle than a bow...so I vote "THEY" don't know what "THEY" are talking about!