Abstract The paper reviews fisheries proposals made during the Caracas session of LOS III. Of the 83 proposals made in Committee II (which is to determine the nature and limits of national jurisdiction), twelve related solely or in part to fisheries. The position taken in these proposals on issues of fisheries management and allocation is shown in Table I. While a 200-mile economic zone has been almost universally conceded, positions on exclusive versus preferential rights are far apart. With respect to fishing rights, exclusive rights imply no mandatory sharing, little mention or description of the role of regional fishery organizations, and little reference to allocation priorities. Because the states favouring exclusive rights are more numerous than those favouring preferential rights, a Convention tending to an exclusive rights formula seems most likely. High-seas fisheries will probably get little attention in a Convention. This could change if Committee I (dealing with the seabed) and Committee II are combined as a result of an initiative to get living and non-living resources under the umbrella of an international authority. However, the interest of a number of key states in keeping anadramous and migratory species out of a general “international sea” agreement make this unlikely. Salmon will probably not get the special provisions the United States and Canada want — not enough states have a general interest in salmon to want to make a special exception for it. The next session of the Conference will have to deal more thoroughly with fisheries. There are no “winning” proposals at the present time. The concept of regions, and of disadvantaged states in such regions may be particularly troublesome.