October 11, 1933

This journal entry refers to Sigurd's testimony in Minneapolis at a hearing that the International Joint Commission held as part of its process of deciding whether or not to allow an immense waterpower development plan proposed by lumber baron Edward W. Backus. The plan, which was eventually denied, would have flooded several thousand miles of canoe country shoreline. Sigurd's testimony there marked the beginning of a new phase in his role as a wilderness activist. In the past, his conservation work had been almost exclusively at the local level, mostly speaking to Ely civic groups about the necessity of preserving the canoe country wilderness. But his testimony before the International Joint Commission gained him attention at the state level of the Izaak Walton League, which was playing a major role in fighting the waterpower proposal. Even more important, he was commended by a man who was emerging as a national leader in wilderness preservation: Ernest C. Oberholtzer, soon after the International Joint Commission hearing, placed Sigurd on his select mailing list of conservation correspondents. For Sigurd, however, as the journal entry below shows, the positive reaction to his testimony boosted his self-esteem and made him think about how he could bring the same kind of magic into his writing.

On returning from the meeting
of the Int. Joint Commission
at Minneapolis.

I went down to the hearing with little knowledge of what I wanted to say and up to the time I took the stand, I knew nothing. Right now I do not remember just what I did say but I believe judging by the many compliments I received that whatever I did say was pertinent. I forget how many came around, but among them was the attorney general for Minn., Frank Warren of Mpls. Oberholtzer, Kaupanger and others. All of them said that I had made a wonderful impression on the commission. The fact that the commission itself was interested enough to talk things over with me was of importance.

All of this left me with one concrete impression and that was that somehow I have the power of conveying my enthusiasm to others, particularly men. I can make them see and feel what I see and feel of the out of doors. Of all the witnesses I alone brought out this which explains no doubt that I alone received applause.

I accept all of the gratefully but more than that it brought out for me a very important discovery and that is that I have the ability of transmitting my feeling for the woods to others in perhaps a different manner. I have something to tell and it is something men will listen to. Why not utilize that in your writing. For years I have been searching for a medium. Here it is, the love of men for the things I love. This is to many an intangible thing but to me it is very real and to many others it is very real, real enough so that it can be written about and discussed, as real as love of home and family and as necessary to a complete life as the latter. This then will be my theme, the love of men for the life in the open, the love of men for the companionship that goes with it, the love of men for all things, that have to do with it, the trappings of the life we know.

That alone was worth far more than the trip itself to me, to find out that my medium will not be as Thoreau a self analysis or as Burroughs a self interpretation of nature or as Scoville Jr. a painting of color, but something different, no not new but something very definite, the love of a man the passion of men for the life in the open. Here is something that will never wear out. I may attack it from a different angle as time goes on but it will be the central theme song of all my work. When I am through they will say that man had a greater love and could transmit it to others more clearly than anyone else. Men like to talk about things that lie close to their hearts and will pay for material that comforts them and gives them a renewed vision. When a man goes duck hunting, it is not merely the ducks that count, but the feeling that goes with it. He actually loves the sound of whistling wings, he loves the bob of the decoys in the rice and most of all the feeling that he is doing something primitive, that satisfies. There are a million things that a man gets pleasure out of and the secret here is not to tell of anything except through indirect suggestion, that will mean a reading between the lines.

What then will be my medium? Will it be stories of the out of door type similar to others I have written or will it be something else.

I imagine it will have to be regular out of door stories weaving in them my love of the things I do rather than a mere chronicling of events. There are many places where this can be done, a subtle weaving in of events. I believe more now than ever, that there is a depth of purpose that can be worked out in all of this, an opportunity to develop a conservation spirit through that medium and an added love of the woods. If I can make my stories and articles convey the same impression that my little talk evidently conveyed in Mpls. then I will have accomplished something.

If it is the essay and there may be a few of them, it will be more difficult. However there is a possibility there too. It will have to be many things. The most important of all however was to realize that there is something more important than mere monetary recompense. The appreciation and comradeship of other men is the big thing. to have other men come to me and tell me that I hit the spot in a certain article is worth more than anything else.

My scientific writing is through. I can see nothing there that others cannot do much better than I. Why mix up in that when I have a field of my own. Do what you can do well and leave the rest for the other fellow. One cannot be proficient in more than one thing.

At least it has given me respect for what I can do better than others and that is to talk. If I can talk then I can write.