Coastal Fisheries Management Research Articles

Criticism from former director of fisheries

In an article published in Marine Policy a year ago, (Lynne and Brian Chatterton, ‘How much political compromise can fisheries management stand’, Vol 5, No 1, April 1981), it was argued that management of South Australian coastal fisheries reflected the political ideology of the government in power, rather than the biological and socioeconomic imperatives of the resource. In the first article below, A.M. Olsen, former Director of Fisheries, criticizes the Chattertons' conclusions, maintaining that fisheries should be managed by professionals not politicians and that many of Brian Chatterton's problems during his tenure as Minister of Fisheries were of his own making. In the Chattertons' response, they point out that by allocating management of the resource between various vested interests (including government bureaucracy) a minister is making a political decision. In the third article, R.D. Walkerden, a former Permanent Secretary to Fisheries Ministers in South Australia, offers an administrator's view of the controversy. Detailed and parochial as some of the points at issue appear, the debate provides an illuminating view of some of the ideological and organizational conflicts that can hinder the effective management of a coastal resource.

The Chattertons reply

In an article published in Marine Policy a year ago, (Lynne and Brian Chatterton, ‘How much political compromise can fisheries management stand’, Vol 5, No 1, April 1981), it was argued that management of South Australian coastal fisheries reflected the political ideology of the government in power, rather than the biological and socioeconomic imperatives of the resource. In the first article below, A.M. Olsen, former Director of Fisheries, criticizes the Chattertons' conclusions, maintaining that fisheries should be managed by professionals not politicians and that many of Brian Chatterton's problems during his tenure as Minister of Fisheries were of his own making. In the Chattertons' response, they point out that by allocating management of the resource between various vested interests (including government bureaucracy) a minister is making a political decision. In the third article, R.D. Walkerden, a former Permanent Secretary to Fisheries Ministers in South Australia, offers an administrator's view of the controversy. Detailed and parochial as some of the points at issue appear, the debate provides an illuminating view of some of the ideological and organizational conflicts that can hinder the effective management of a coastal resource.

Administrative aspects

In an article published in Marine Policy a year ago, (Lynne and Brian Chatterton, ‘How much political compromise can fisheries management stand’, Vol 5, No 1, April 1981), it was argued that management of South Australian coastal fisheries reflected the political ideology of the government in power, rather than the biological and socioeconomic imperatives of the resource. In the first article below, A.M. Olsen, former Director of Fisheries, criticizes the Chattertons' conclusions, maintaining that fisheries should be managed by professionals not politicians and that many of Brian Chatterton's problems during his tenure as Minister of Fisheries were of his own making. In the Chattertons' response, they point out that by allocating management of the resource between various vested interests (including government bureaucracy) a minister is making a political decision. In the third article, R.D. Walkerden, a former Permanent Secretary to Fisheries Ministers in South Australia, offers an administrator's view of the controversy. Detailed and parochial as some of the points at issue appear, the debate provides an illuminating view of some of the ideological and organizational conflicts that can hinder the effective management of a coastal resource.