This paper compares and contrasts the Dust Bowl of the 1930s in the United States with the concurrent environmental crisis in Palliser's Triangle, Alberta, Canada. It examines the deep-rooted agricultural and economic causes of the American Dust Bowl, including poor farming practices, capitalist expansion during World War I, and the abandonment of crop rotation. It then contrasts these factors with conditions in Palliser's Triangle, where natural aridity and geographic limitations played a larger role than human ignorance or greed. The paper also highlights differences in governmental responses, noting that Canada's Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration emphasized technical education rather than financial subsidies.
This paper demonstrates effective use of the compare-and-contrast method at the analytical level. Rather than treating the two cases in isolated blocks, it weaves comparisons throughout (e.g., crop rotation practiced in Canada but not in the American West), which strengthens the argument and keeps the reader oriented. The concluding synthesis elevates the paper from description to interpretation.
The paper opens with the deep historical roots of the American Dust Bowl, moves through economic pressures and farming failures, then pivots to the Canadian context in Palliser's Triangle. It closes by contrasting governmental responses and offering a final analytical judgment about the relative weight of human versus natural factors in each case. The structure is linear and progressive, building toward a clear concluding claim.
The causes of the Dust Bowl phenomenon of the 1930s in America had roots that stretched far beyond the immediate period of extreme drought that predated this era of American history. People had settled the Great Plains over the course of the 19th century during an unusually wet stretch of weather for the region. This meant that the vast majority of farmers did not truly understand the nature of the climate on which their livelihoods depended. 19th-century farmers often experienced immediate and unusual success with their crops, and they did not grow accustomed to using farming techniques truly suited to the land or the climate. "Farmers had also switched from the lister to the one-way disc plow. The one-way disc plow was more efficient, but it also left the soil more susceptible to wind erosion" — the most obvious and visually dramatic symptom of the drought, hence the name "Dust Bowl" ("Causes," The Dust Bowl Outline, 2003).
Capitalist greed, along with ignorance and a false sense of confidence about how to farm the land, contributed to the Dust Bowl, according to Donald Worster. There was a wheat boom during World War I, but it was followed by a sharp drop in prices during the 1920s. Farmers developed a near "compulsion" to "plough and plant every available parcel of the ground" — first to make a profit, and then to sustain the profits they had made during the boom (Worster 1975). The increasing expense of farming the plains drove residents to abandon any pretense of crop rotation and to farm every bit of land available.
The balance between human activity and nature — personified for Worster by the Native American tribal attitude toward the land — had been destroyed. Worster argues that these peoples had a "much greater sense of husbandry than either the modern American business farmer or his frontier predecessor" (Worster 199).
In contrast to the initially hopeful conditions experienced by 19th-century American pioneers, the early settlers in Palliser's Triangle in Alberta Province struggled from the beginning. Although the 1930s as a whole were marked by dramatic periods of "boom and bust" for all farmers, for the residents of the Triangle the periods of "boom" were far shorter and more cruel (McNeill 40). Indeed, when Captain John Palliser first reached the prairies, he was said to have thought he had "discovered Hell" because the region was so arid and desert-like. Still, Palliser noted "a fertile belt surrounding the region" (Bonikowsky 2007). Like the Great Plains, the area's main inhabitants were Indigenous peoples and buffalo (McNeill 41). The British government ignored Palliser's dim prognosis about developing the area and encouraged settlement nonetheless.
Although it could be argued that both Dust Bowls resulted from humans venturing into territories unsuitable for farming and making demands above and beyond what the land could provide, natural conditions rather than ignorance, greed, or changed market conditions were more of a determining factor in the Canadian example.
Bonikowsky, Laura Neilson. "Drought in Palliser's Triangle." The Canadian Encyclopedia. 2007.
"Causes." The Dust Bowl Outline. 2003.
McNeill, J.R. Something New Under the Sun: An Environmental History of the Twentieth Century. W.W. Norton & Co., 2001.
Worster, Donald. The Dust Bowl. Oxford University Press, 1982.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.