March 1956 (age 56)

This was the final month before publication of The Singing Wilderness, and Alfred Knopf was getting advance copies out to reviewers and other key people, such as National Park Service leaders and members of the Park Service's advisory board. On March 28, Sigurd received his first personal letter of praise for the book, from famed Milwaukee Journal outdoor writer Gordon Maquarrie, who said, "That's a lovely job....You should be very, very proud."

This was also a very active month on the conservation front for Sigurd. The national fight to preserve Dinosaur National Monument from being flooded by the Colorado River Sotrage Project--the most important conservation cause of the decade--was nearing its end. Howard Zahniser successfully got included in the water project bill a statement that "no dam or reservoir constructed under the authorization of the Act shall be within any National Park or Monument." This line, which became part of the law when it passed on April 11, established a key principle for the future establishment of a national wilderness preservation system. [For more background on this issue and Sigurd's role, click here.] And so the national conservation leaders were gearing up to introduce just such a bill in congress. Late in March Sigurd received a letter from Minnesota Senator Hubert Humprey, inviting his comments on the bill. [To see Sigurd's response, click here.] Both of these issues were making Sigurd more frustrated in his role as president of the National Parks Association. He felt the NPA just was not taking an active enough role, and he himself wanted to be much more involved. On March 12 he wrote to executive director Fred Packard about his frustrations--frustrations that would lead Sigurd to eventually move out of his leadership role with NPA and into the leadership of The Wilderness Society:

Frankly, I was rather shocked to have the almost completed draft of the Wilderness Bill shoved at me for comment just before leaving for New Orleans. I went to work on it immediately as you know, met with McArdle and Ed Cliff and arranged a post New Orleans conference. However, I could not escape the feeling that we had been left out in the cold on the planning. This feeling was accentuated at the meeting in New Orleans when Zahnie Carl Dave sat up at the table as The Committee. You left rather hurriedly and I wondered at the time if the reason was your feeling of exclusion. We must give this matter full support and will but it disturbs me that we play the role of onlookers in something as vital as this. This measure should merit full support by all organizations but especially by the NPA. On the drive to Knoxville with Zahnie, he explained in great detail the difficulties and maneuverings to get Connie to put into Mission 66 Points the one on wilderness. He and Dave did a grand job, but again, WHY WERE YOU NOT ASKED TO WORK WITH THEM. WHY WAS I NOT ASKED MY OPINION OF THE IDEA? Now looms the Scenic Resources Survey sparked by Dave Brower and again we are sitting on the sidelines giving support. WHY WERE WE NOT ASKED TO COME IN ON THAT? I have talked about wilderness legislation for some time with Zahnie and many others. Chuck Stoddard has talked about it as well as the possibilities of a Scenic Resources Survey. In short all of these ideas have been going through the mill for a long time. They are not secret and it is no one organizations prerogative to carry the flag. This whole issue is far too big to narrow down to any one small group. The power and strength of any such movement lies in the loyalty and sense of teamwork that exists in all groups with a basic purpose. The fact that this principle seems to be ignored at the moment disturbs me.

Last fall, as I told you, I ran into Mr. Anderson of the Wild. Soc. Council and he proceeded to open up and tell me that the NPA was not assuming its full leadership. Later George Marshall in NY inferred the same thing, evidently referring to the Echo Park fight and our failure to follow through on the Committee set up right after the New York conference and my refusal to allow my name to be used for that news release in Denver. I could not explain at the time, that I could not come out in the open because of a complicated maneuvering with Orme Lewis and McKay on Mining especially Int. Nickel in the QS Area, an issue which substantially effected the whole mining problem in the US. Be that as it may, now we are behind the eight ball. The leadership has definitely been taken with us and we are in the untenable position of having to support issues with which we have had no part as far as planning was concerned. It gives me a sense of failure and I wonder what we have done that is wrong. Perhaps there are many things I do not know about. Perhaps you were invited to sit in and take part in all of these things and did not let me know. I cannot be in Washington all of the time and no doubt many things take place that I am not aware of and perhaps I make mountains out of molehills, but at New Orleans I could not escape the feeling that the NPA was no longer assuming its full share of responsibility and that we were being by passed.

March 1971 (age 71)

Sigurd, commenting on March 9 to Canadian friend and conservationist Bruce Littlejohn on the possibility of "therapeutic logging" being allowed in Ontario's Quetico Provincial Park: "As far as I can see, it is just another name for harvesting and will bring in roads and disturbance just as any other program would."