of the land was controlled by disinterested reason alone or that recommendations served up with scientific credentials would necessarily be adopted."(pg. 209) And finally the agronomists took their best shot by introducing new farming techniques, such as terracing and planting shelterbelts of trees, as an attempt to recapture the essence of the land. The agronomists, although they were more successful in getting their version of conservation translated into action, were ultimately ineffectual, too.In the end, Worster claims that neither the federal land-use planners, ecologists, nor the agronomists made a lasting impact on the region. "Conservation as a cultural reform had come to be accepted only where and insofar as it had helped the plains culture reach its traditional expansionary aims."(pg. 230) The Dust Bowl, even more so than the Great Depression, became the dominant national symbol of bankruptcy and ecological decay-the irony is that it was the capitalistic values that our country holds so highly that ultimately facilitated both the creation of the Dust Bowl and the Great Depression. Worster's "Dust Bowl" is a very informative work that makes a great contribution to understanding the effects that a consumer society can have on the land. Worster set forth a strong argument and supported it finely with great details. I agree with his views for the most part, but I feel like the southern plainsmen did what they had to do to keep up with the big city industries. In this society, the axiom "root, hog, or die" holds true in every aspect of the culture. So, in my opinion, the only way for the Dust Bowl to have been curtailed sooner would have been for the people there to stop "breaking" the land all together and let mother nature take over and fix herself. Of course, that would be asking the impossible since it would mean the plains people would have to give up, and lose to the capitalistic society of which they were trying to...
