Decision Date: October 17, 2000

Panel: Cindy Derkaz

Keywords: appeal; Wildlife Act – s. 24; Firearm and Hunting Licensing Regulation – s. 2.02; hunting licence

Craig Kohorst appealed a decision of the Deputy Director to cancel his hunting licence for a period of approximately 1 year and 8 months. The decision further required that Mr. Kohorst successfully complete the C.O.R.E. program before his licence would be reinstated.

The Deputy Director’s decision was based on Mr. Kohorst having been charged with three offences under the Wildlife Act as a result of shooting a less-than-full-curl ram in full-curl season. Two of the charges were stayed, while Mr. Kohorst pled guilty to the third charge of failing to retrieve the edible portions of wildlife. Mr. Kohorst submitted that the cancellation period was excessive, considering that he had exercised due diligence in shooting the ram. Mr. Kohorst stated that he had an honest, although mistaken, belief that the ram was full-curl, and that the reason he could not adequately retrieve the wildlife was due to a leg injury that he sustained earlier in the day.

The Board found that the Deputy Director’s decision was reasonable in the circumstances. In particular, the Board noted that although Mr. Kohorst was an experienced hunter who had no previous record of convictions, the offence nonetheless displayed poor hunting ethics, and directly impacted on wildlife resources. The Board also determined that the cancellation period imposed in this case was generally consistent with other hunting licence cancellation cases. The appeal was dismissed.