Mr. K. Seymour shot an elk which he then found had fewer than the required six-points (on its antlers). Fearing that it would be confiscated, he hid this first elk in the bush and continued to hunt until he shot and killed an elk with the legal six-points. He was convicted under the Wildlife Act for failing to remove the edible portions of wildlife and exceeding the possession limit. Soon afterwards the Assistant Deputy Director cancelled his license for two years and required that he complete the CORE examinations to regain his eligibility.
The Board found that Mr. Seymour did not intend to shoot the first elk, and regretted not removing the meat; however, this did not constitute grounds for appeal. The Assistant Deputy Director gave him an opportunity to be heard and did not err in his discretion. Finally, although Mr. Seymour was told during plea bargaining that his hunting privileges would not be lost because of the convictions, the offences and administrative penalties are separate in the Wildlife Act and must be considered separately. The Assistant Deputy Director was unable to consider the Court-imposed fine in deciding to suspend Mr. Seymour’s licence. The appeal was dismissed.