Decision Date: July 27, 2006
Panel: Cindy Derkaz
Keywords: Wildlife Act – s. 53; Angling and Scientific Collection Regulation – s. 11, Schedule A; Provincial Guided Angler Day Allocation and Pricing Policy Working Document; guided angler days.
Brian Larsen, Jason Smith, John Wallace and Stephen Kim Sedrovic (the “Appellants”) appealed four decisions made by the Regional Manager Environmental Stewardship (the “Regional Manager”) concerning ten year allocations of guided angler days to each of the Appellants on classified waters in the Kootenay Region. The Appellants appealed the Regional Manager’s allocations on various grounds including: the East Kootenay Angling Management Plan (the “Plan”), upon which the allocations were based, is not founded on sound or appropriate scientific analysis; angling guides did not have an opportunity to participate in the development and implementation of the Plan; the guiding history of the Appellants had not been given proper consideration in the allocation process; the allocations were unfair and unreasonable; and the allocations resulted in economic hardship. Each of the Appellants sought an increase in the number of guided angling days allocated to him.
The Board found that neither the Appellants nor the Third Parties had established that the implementation of the Plan was inappropriate, unfair or based on unsound scientific analysis. The Board found that the Plan contained both public and stakeholder input, and that the Appellants had not demonstrated that there was a lack of notice to the angling guide community in respect to the development of the Plan. The Board further found that the guided angler days had been allocated to each of the Appellants in accordance with the Plan, the Ministry of Environment’s Provincial Guided Angler Day Allocation and Pricing Policy Working Document, and with Schedule A of the Angling and Scientific Collection Regulation (the “Regulation”). The Board found that neither the Regional Manager nor the Board has the authority to allocate guided angler days in excess of the maximum set out in Schedule A of the Regulation.
The appeals were dismissed.