KRP. That is what I advocate! However I think the artist must have seen it that way also! Therefore he or she must have moved some bone conviently out of the way! LOL.
Where that image originally appeared there was actually a notation that the bones had been moved forward to better illustrate the soft tissue, and that the reader should take that into account.
Angus, I think the diaphragm in that rendition is drawn where it joins the inside of the ribs, rather than as it sits in the center of the chest/abdomen. Seems like I am always reaching further in around the edges to cut it free than where I can see it in the center above the intestines. There is also the effect of gravity and rumen pressure on an animal when it is whole and alive and standing, so an artist rendition drawn from a dead animal that is probably lying on its side may require artistic license and a bit of interpretation.
A general observation, one thing on the skeletal illustrations, they do correctly show that the front leg is not a vertical column, but in fact the shoulder joint is well forward of the radus/ulna that make up the lower front leg below the lower line of the chest. That of course is when the elk is standing on the leg and the lower leg is vertical. So to hit the actual shoulder joint, you are shooting well forward of the rear point of the elbow joint. If you never disjoint an animal and bone it, you may assume the leg bones form a vertical column and misinterpret the location of the upper leg bone (humerus) and actual position of the scapula (shoulder blade).
