The appellant was convicted of shooting a grizzly bear without a license. The respondent cancelled the appellant’s hunting license for two years and ordered he complete the C.O.R.E. examination. The appellant appealed the decision arguing that he mistakenly shot the grizzly bear thinking that it was a black bear.
The Board upheld the decision finding that the fact that the appellant had mistakenly shot the grizzly bear was no defense to the suspension. If he had doubt about the identity of the bear he should not have shot it. The Board found that although the appellant is an experienced hunter, since he made such a basic error in judgement he was still required to take the CORE course.