Every once in a while, a government agency offers an interpretation of the law so thin, so hollow, and so self‑defeating that it stops you in your tracks. That’s exactly what happened with Petition 2025‑003, where the State now claims the Fish and Game Commission satisfied all of its legal obligations simply by forwarding the petition to the Department. No hearing, no vote, no decision — just a handoff.

It’s the kind of argument that triggers a very real rule in administrative law: the absurdity doctrine. When an interpretation makes a statute stop functioning, courts reject it. And the State’s “forward and forget” theory doesn’t just bend the APA — it breaks it.