The Dust Bowl

Weather changes have once provided enormous damage to people of Canada and the United States in the 1930’s with farmers having to incur massive losses. The affected regions had to bear with these losses, famine, and drought but there was a group of people that would have been accountable to these losses. President Roosevelt crafted specific measures that would be applied in calming the affected farmers urging them to plant a few crops to sustain family needs (Duncan 65). The suffering during this period claimed a significant pattern with the farmers having to bear with the region’s conditions. Worster (62) indicates that the pattern of the reaction was based on a sequence of failure to anticipate drought, underestimating periods of drought, expecting rains in fewer months, and defending the regions against critics. This paper demonstrates the laxity of Roosevelt’s administration during this period of hardships.

Scope

Duration for the rescue was a major player during this period with the affected persons seeking compensation from certain departments. For instances, where notifications are given to the farmers regarding the wind, and if so, what time was it made for the farmers to have alternative measures after the occurrence of the natural disaster (Egan 13). Furthermore, there is a need to interpret the various causes of the Dust Bowl about the effect that was caused by the disaster. Similarly, what health hazards did the population face after the occurrence of this disaster.

Literature Review

            There is a need to look into the human-made causes of the blow. According to some publications, farmers in this region had practiced extensive farming combined with severe drought which later increased the chances of the wind blow. According to documentation by Worster (10), an estimated 3 million men and women lost their jobs and were out of work. This instances transpired aftermath of the stock market crashing hence leaving their workplaces without pay. There was a formation of a different type of capital in the American economy. There was an increased number of capital-labor in the country that would be utilized in other sectors of the economy. Arthi (165) laments that the labor was formed after the massive destruction of agricultural produce collapsing the farm incomes. Leaving the land bare will always provide a better opportunity for the winds to blow through without obstructions. It is further stated by Cordova and Porter (1710) that the 1930s Dust Bowl was an environmental crisis that involved soil erosion and population distributions.

Conclusion

            The administration in the United States and Canada during that era had to find certain solutions that would be used to develop the lives of their citizenry. A relatively huge number of people lost their lives, plantations, and income after the disaster tempting them to migrate into other places to attain better ways of life. Similarly, the nations were faced with severe economic depression failing to meet certain needs for their citizenry hence resorting to dependence from other countries. Lastly, the administrations of the affected states will have to be held accountable for not providing sufficient information to the public about the suitable places that they would go to seek shelter.

Works Cited

Arthi, Vellore. Human capital formation and the American Dust Bowl. Oxford: University of Oxford, 2016. Online.

Cordova, Carlos, and Jess C. Porter. “The 1930s Dust Bowl: Geoarchaeological lessons from a 20th-century environmental crisis.”Holocene (2015): 1707-1720. Online.

Duncan, Dayton. The Dust Bowl: an illustrated history. San Francisco: Chronicle Books, 2012. Print.

Egan, Timothy. The worst hard time: the untold story of those who survived the great American dust bowl. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2011. Print.

Worster, Donald. Dust Bowl: the southern Plains in the 1930s. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004. Print.