Conservation
The idea of conservation arose in the 1890s as more land became developed and people realized that the nation’s natural resources were not unlimited. Conservationists believed that nature should be used for the greatest good for the greatest number of people in society. To some, this meant preserving nature “untouched” for its own sake. To others, conservation meant making the most efficient use of natural resources and changing nature to meet the needs of society.
The debates over the fate of the Skokie Marsh offer a way to see how the competing ideas of conservation – preservation and scientific conservation – played out on a local landscape. In the 19th century, most people saw the marsh as a nuisance and believed that it should be drained to allow for development. But as Chicago and its suburbs grew, open spaces became increasingly rare. Many urban residents came to value nature as an antidote to the problems of the city.
By the 1920s, most people believed that the Skokie Marsh should be preserved as a park. But supporters split over what the park should look like. Preservationists believed that the marsh should be protected in its “natural state,” despite the flooding and fires. Others agreed that the space should be preserved for recreation and wildlife habitat, but argued that the landscape needed to be changed to manage the flow of the Skokie River.
As in much of the nation during the first half of the 20th century, the idea of scientific conservation won out in the Skokie Marsh. Although the area would remain a nature preserve, the landscape would be changed to meet society’s needs for flood control and recreation.
