We all have personal preferences.

The older I get, the less interest I have in backed-up hunting in a general sense. As hard as I try, I simply can't get revved up at the notion of hunting critters alongside a fellow who will take care of things if I foul up. My least-prized trophies are those shot in the presence of another guy who was holding a gun.

Now, mind you, I am not condemning the industry, individuals or traditions of this sort of hunting and in fact I sort of applaud it, as it has had wonderful results for the maintenance of game populations of many species. I am merely stating my personal preference in hunting. I like to scout, hunt and kill by my lonesome, or with friends as a team, but not as a backed-up shooter.

This leads to one of my biggest problems with bow-hunting elephant, the topic at hand. The one thing I know about it is that it is almost exclusively rifle-supported hunting in total and in spades.

Meaning, the whole affair is somewhat meaningless TO ME, even less so than when done with a rifle, as the fellow with a rifle has a much better chance of clinching the deal himself, by himself and without any assistance from the Second Gun. With a bow {tho it may be technically, highly lethal ballistically-speaking} I bet many, many large dangerous critters arrowed are killed with a rifle. Sticking a critter with an arrow all the while being fairly certain a gunshot will follow would personally leave me completely empty.

If a rifle is used to make a kill possible with a bow {by hobbling or crippling it}, that is a different thing, and it is completely shameful in my opinion.

Those who possess the skill, work within their own known limitations, use a proven, sufficiently-lethal bow and take on an elephant alone with said bow have my utmost respect. I suppose such fellows are exceedingly few, if they exist at all.

I am still wondering how many safari-hunted elephant die with a bullet from the pro in them...