The appellant was convicted of 3 counts of possession of wildlife without a license. The two serious charges which led to the suspension was possession of two grizzly bear hides without a license. One of the bear’s had a radio collar on it which the appellant had cut off and left after skinning the bear. The respondent, acting on the recommendation of the conservation officer, suspended the appellant’ s license for 5 years and ordered the appellant to take the CORE test before re-applying.
The Board found that the respondent’s terms of suspension were too harsh. It held that the two serious offences of which the appellant was found guilty were not done with criminal intent. It further held that the conservation officer in question acted out of a certain vindictiveness in being frustrated at tracking down the collared grizzly bear.