The Pros And Cons Of The Progressive Era

1907 Words8 Pages

In the 1800s, calls for change erupted from the public after numerous events broadcasted what mismanagement of natural resources can lead to. In 1871, the Peshtigo Fire in Wisconsin sent a message to the public that change was necessary, which was further reinforced through the after effects of smoke filled skies of industrial areas and degraded lands once beautiful now overgrazed to their roots. The cries of the public rendered new initiatives calling for better management of natural resources, as well as valuing these resources at more appropriate levels. These changes lead to the birth of conservation and preservation, and through this the means for advocates like George Catlin, John Muir, George Marsh and Theodore Roosevelt are provided for gaining public support for new management. …show more content…

This era became known as the Progressive Era, by laying down the groundwork for new management of resources and the creation of national parks, refuges and the creation of federal agencies in charge of these newly created protected lands. The goal of the Progressive Era was to conserve natural resources for the continued use and sustainability, however, not everything goes according to plan. The ‘Roaring Twenties’ after WWI brought an end to many of the Progressive Eras regulation, claiming the policy initiatives went too far and was corrupt. The policy reforms created by the Progressive Era were also said to be too weak and weren’t enforced to the capacity with which they were created to. Not only that, but there was unrestricted resource use and extraction which led to even more disastrous events such as the Dust Bowl, a result from over use by farmers and ranchers and the Great Depression following the war. This result was directly opposite to the desired effect of conservation management and a need for change was called for once

Open Document