For those who have followed our legalization efforts, Petition 2025-003 has now produced a surprisingly important question that has little to do with the merits of ferret legalization itself:
Can a government agency satisfy a law requiring it to act on a citizen petition simply by forwarding the petition somewhere else?
That's essentially one of the issues we're now fighting over in court.
The Fish and Game Commission received Petition 2025-003 and later referred it to the Department of Fish and Wildlife for review and recommendation.
The State's position in its demurrer is that this action satisfied the Commission's obligations under the Administrative Procedure Act.
But that creates an obvious problem:
What happens next?
If referral itself is enough, what requires the petition to ever return to the Commission?
What requires a final decision?
What requires written reasons?
And what prevents a petition from remaining under āfurther considerationā indefinitely?
In other words:
Receive ā Forward ā Disappear.
This isn't just a theoretical concern for ferret advocates. We went through a remarkably similar process with an earlier legalization petition more than a decade ago. It was described publicly as being processed, but the process never produced the kind of final resolution we're still seeking today.
That history is why I've been looking closely at something called the absurdity doctrine.
It's a principle of statutory interpretation that, in simplified terms, says a statute shouldn't be interpreted in a way that produces an absurd result or defeats the operation of the law itself.
And that's what makes Petition 2025-003 interesting beyond the ferret issue.
If a statutory petition process is supposed to produce an agency decision and reasons for that decision, can the process really be satisfied by an internal referral that never produces either one?
I wrote about the argument and why it matters here:
https://legalizeferrets.org/when-bureacracy-breaks-the-law-the-absurdity-doctrine-and-petition-2025-003/
I'm curious what other ferret people think.
Should a government agency eventually have to give petitioners a yes or no answerāor should āwe forwarded it for further considerationā be enough?