As the Court sees it, there is no "gap." The legislature defined fish to include terrestrial invertebrates, including discussing one specifically (a snail). Th

As the Court sees it, there is no "gap." The legislature defined fish to include terrestrial invertebrates, including discussing one specifically (a snail). The Court has to do something to resolve the issue. Either the legislature meant to include some but not all terrestrial invertebrates (e.g. snails but not bugs), or they included all (snails and bugs). The court went with the literal meaning of what the legislature wrote rather than drawing arbitrary lines without support. What would you have them do instead?