Keywords:Wildlife Act – ss. 49(1), 19(1)(c), 70(1)(b), 52; Angling and Scientific Collection Regulation – s. 1 definitions of “classified water”, “license year”, s.11, Schedule A; rod days
Justin Gyger, an angling guide, appealed the decision of the Regional Fish and Wildlife Manager (the “Regional Manager) to adjust his 100 rod days on the Clore River to zero.
The Board found that Mr. Gyger wrongly applied for unclassified rod days on a classified water. The Ministry also erred when, in processing Mr. Gyger’s application, it failed to identify the Clore River as a classified water. The Regional Manager granted what there was no authority to grant – unclassified rod days on a classified water. When the mistake was discovered, the Regional Manager correctly adjusted Mr. Gyger’s rod days on the Clore River to zero.
The Board also considered whether it should grant Mr. Gyger a permit or licence for additional rod days on the Clore River. Mr. Gyger submitted that the permit granted to him for 75 days on the Clore River after the classified period was insufficient compensation for the financial loss he had suffered as a result of the Ministry’s administrative error. The Board found that that Mr. Gyger had already received fair compensation for the Ministry’s error. Additionally, the Board found that there was insufficient evidence to issue a permit to Mr. Gyger.
The Board also denied Mr. Gyger’s request for a licence granting additional rod days on the Clore River. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed, and Mr. Gyger’s application for costs was denied.