I read a little into this story and how they do this is because under the California Endangered Species Act, fish are defined as “wild fish, mollusk, crustacean, invertebrate, (or) amphibian.”
And since bees are invertebrates the court listed them as a protected species.
This is, IMO, bad precedent, because it's an example of the court interpreting law in an obviously flawed way. Probably no harm here, but the precedent can lead to some bad things.