420 FORBIDDEN FISH—NETTING—VIVARIA 
vivaria, etc., universally free; thus “in the Sea of Tiberias 
fishing with hook and net was everywhere allowed’’ (Krauss, 
Talmud Archdol., ii. 146, with references to Bab. Kam. 81°. 
Cf. the Roman Digest which lays down that “ omnia animalia 
que terra, mari, celo capiuntur, id est fere bestia, et volucres, et 
pisces, capientium fiunt.”’ } 
Mainzer, however, severely restricts this freedom of fishing.? 
“Incidentally information is given of a modification of the 
regulation. For instance, if any one set up a net on a shore 
or a bank, others were not allowed to fish in proximity to it. 
They were only allowed to cast their nets at a distance of one 
parasang away.” 
This sentence apparently implies that the first comer to 
some position on land acquired a legal temporary possession 
of fishing for the distance of a parasang. This regulation 
(extracted, apparently, from the reference 5, 7.e. to Baba 
Bathra, 21 b) came into being (according to Rabbi Gershom, 
as cited by Mainzer), “‘ because the fisherman scatters bait in 
the water which attracts the fish to his net. But if another 
person sets up his net near by, the fish at the sight of the fresh 
bait would swim to the other spot, and so the first fisherman 
would suffer loss.’ 
The first (comer), adds Mainzer, ‘“‘ by the setting up of his 
net has acquired a priority claim over all the fish of a definite 
area.” 
This theory of possession appears to me quite untenable, 
for two reasons. 
The first, because no words, judgment, or even obiter 
dictum contained in the reference given, support it. A Rabbi’s 
pious opinion does not suffice, as Baba Bathra, 21°, makes 
clear. The passage runs: 
‘* Rabbi Hona said, ‘If a man who lives in a passage has set 
up a mill, and another in the same passage comes and likewise 
sets up one, the former has the right to prevent him, for he can 
say to him, Thou cuttest off my means of livelihood.’”’ In 
1 Justinian, Corpus Juris Civilis, vol. I., Digest, 41, 1, I. 
2 Op. cit., supra, p. 405. 
® Goldschmidt’s Der Babylonische Talmud, vol. VI. p. 1005. 
