Independence Hall at 250: A Measuring Stick for Liberty

Inside Independence Hall, the rooms are quiet now. Sunlight falls across worn floorboards where delegates once argued, compromised, and ultimately committed themselves to a radical idea: that legitimate government exists to secure rights, not to grant them. Preserved and interpreted by the National Park Service, Independence Hall functions as a constitutional classroom, one that teaches not only what Americans declared in 1776, but why they felt compelled to do so.

As the nation approaches the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, this place invites comparison. The Declaration is not merely a founding document; it is a measuring stick. It lists concrete grievances, specific abuses of power, that convinced ordinary colonists that liberty was slipping away. Those grievances deserve careful, restrained comparison with modern governance, not as rhetoric, but as civic examination.

Grievances Then: What the Colonists Feared

The Declaration cataloged patterns of conduct by the British Crown that, taken together, amounted to tyranny. Among the most consequential concerns were these:

Unfair and coercive taxation.
Colonists objected not simply to taxes, but to taxes imposed without meaningful consent, financial burdens enforced by distant authority, insulated from accountability.

Meaningless political representation.
Representation existed in name only. Colonial assemblies could be dissolved, ignored, or overridden. Participation without influence proved hollow.

The forced quartering of soldiers.
British troops were embedded among civilians, backed by legal protections that favored the military over the populace. This blurred the line between civil life and state force.

Arrest, detention, and removal without local justice.
Colonists accused of crimes could be transported across the Atlantic to face trial in Great Britain, far from juries of peers, local evidence, or public scrutiny.

These were not abstract complaints. They were practical fears about unchecked power: force without accountability, punishment without due process, and authority increasingly removed from the people it governed.

The Measuring Stick: Parallels Worth Examining

Using the Declaration as a measuring stick does not require claiming equivalence between 1776 and today. It requires asking whether similar patterns of power are emerging, and whether safeguards are holding.

Use of Force Without Clear Accountability

The colonists’ concern with standing armies among civilians was fundamentally about accountability. Who answers when force is misused?

In modern America, concerns have grown, across ideological lines, about extra-judicial use of
force by federal agents, including lethal encounters lacking transparent review. The issue is not whether law enforcement should exist; it is whether force is exercised under clear rules, subject to independent oversight, and constrained by law. A system that cannot credibly investigate itself invites erosion of trust.

Detention and Removal Without Due Process

The Declaration objected to people being seized and transported beyond the reach of local courts. Today, debates surrounding immigration enforcement raise parallel constitutional questions.

Lawful immigration enforcement is both necessary and legitimate. Nations have borders; laws must be enforced. But mass detention or deportation without meaningful access to hearings, counsel, or judicial review implicates core protections embedded in the Fourth and Fifth Amendments and the ancient safeguard of habeas corpus. Efficiency cannot substitute for due process without cost to liberty.

Concentration of Executive Power

The Declaration condemned the accumulation of powers in a single authority, law-making, law-enforcing, and law-interpreting drifting together.

Modern concerns about executive power, used to intimidate critics, pressure institutions, or bypass legislative and judicial constraints, echo that warning. This concern is not partisan. Conservatives, in particular, have long cautioned against unchecked federal authority. The question is whether institutional guardrails are respected regardless of who occupies office.

Independence Hall as Classroom, Not Relic

Independence Hall does not instruct visitors what to think; it teaches how to think about power. It reminds us that liberty erodes not only through dramatic acts, but through gradual normalization, when exceptions become habits, and urgency becomes justification.

The founders did not reject law enforcement, taxation, or executive authority. They rejected the absence of limits. Their revolution was not against order, but against unaccountable power.

Civic Vigilance at 250

As America marks 250 years since its declaration, the lesson of Independence Hall is not rebellion, it is vigilance.

Read the Declaration's grievances. Measure modern actions against the founder's warnings. Demand accountability without demonization, enforcement without cruelty, and leadership without intimidation.

The Declaration of Independence is still relevant today not because it guarantees perfection, but because it challenges every generation, including our own, to ask whether power still serves liberty, or whether liberty is quietly being asked to serve power instead.

###

Meet Sean Smith, a master of conservation, adventure, and storytelling! This award-winning
conservationist and former National Park and Forest Ranger has trekked through the wilderness of Yellowstone, Glacier, Mount St. Helens, and the North Cascades, keeping nature safe with his trusty ranger hat and boots. But Sean's talents don't stop there. He's a TEDx speaker and even a private pilot.

But amidst all these adventures, Sean's heart beats for storytelling. He's been spinning tales since childhood, and now he writes thrilling national park novels that'll have you hooked from the first page. Imagine the drama and mystery of the mountains combined with the adrenaline of a rollercoaster ride. That's what you'll find in Sean's books, set against the majestic backdrop of Yellowstone, Gettysburg, and Mount Rainier. His most recent thriller is set in Glacier and will drop later this year.

So, if you're craving an escape into the wild, look no further. Grab a copy of Sean's novels and prepare for an unforgettable adventure. These stories will transport you to the heart of the national parks, where danger lurks and heroes rise. Don't miss out! Find all his captivating novels right here and in the QR code included. 

America at 250: National Parks, the Revolution, and the Ongoing Experiment in Self-Government

This year, the United States marks a milestone: the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. A quarter of a millennium after the thirteen colonies broke from the British Empire, we are still living and benefiting from their bold, unfinished experiment launched in that summer of 1776.

To mark this moment, I’ll be launching a series of blog posts that explore the American Revolution, the subsequent ratification of the Constitution, and the ideas behind these two founding documents, and use the national parks as a lens to focus and center the posts.

Why National Parks?

America’s national parks are more than scenic backdrops or vacation destinations. They are repositories of memory, places where ideals were argued over, defended, tested, and sometimes betrayed. Many parks commemorate Revolutionary War battlefields. Others protect halls of debate, protest sites, migration routes, and landscapes that embody the values the Revolution set in motion: liberty, representation, equality before the law, and civic responsibility.

By grounding this series in national parks, each post will connect place, history, and principle, reminding us that the Revolution was not an abstraction. It happened on real ground, among real people, facing real risks.

The Founders’ Case for Revolution

At the heart of this series will be the question that defined a generation:

Why did the Revolution have to happen?

The founding generation did not rebel casually or impulsively. They argued for years, often fiercely, over whether independence was necessary. Some maintained that a clean break from Great Britain was needed because London based political power had become unaccountable, with colonists' representation in the political process hollow and their fundamental human rights conditional. They believed liberty could not survive under distant authority unchecked by the consent of the governed. Meanwhile, other colonists supported remaining loyal to the British Crown and opposed independence as treason. The political system the colonists operated under, they argued, was flawed but just needed some tweaking. 

Just as importantly, the founding generation arguing for Independence did not claim certainty. What they launched after the war, with the adoption of the U.S. Constitution, was something radical for its time: a self-conscious experiment in self-government, grounded in the belief that free people could govern themselves better than kings or emperors ever could.

An Experiment Still Underway

The American Revolution did not end in 1783. It continues every time citizens vote, protest, serve on juries, speak freely, or hold power to account.

That is why this series will also confront the present.

Alongside historical reflection, posts will examine how the Revolution’s purpose is misunderstood, distorted, or deliberately co-opted in modern political life. We will look at how appeals to “the founders” are often stripped of context, how revolutionary rhetoric is sometimes used to justify authoritarian impulses, and how our democratic institutions are weakened and freedoms undermined in ways the founders would surely condemn. 

What to Expect from the Series

Over the course of 2026, readers can expect posts that:

• Spotlight specific national parks and historic sites tied to Revolutionary ideals

• Examine key moments, arguments, and turning points leading to independence

• Explore the founders’ own doubts, disagreements, and hopes for the future

• Contrast the Revolution’s core purpose with modern efforts to undermine democratic norms

• Ask what it means, here and now, to be stewards of a 250-year-old experiment

Each post will stand on its own, but together they will form a connected narrative: one that treats the Revolution not as settled mythology, but as a living inheritance.

Why This Matters Now

Over the next 12 months, communities across the country will be holding celebrations and events marking the 250th anniversary. It provides us, the beneficiaries of the revolution, with the opportunity to remember and give thanks. But it also offers us an even greater opportunity to honestly reflect and confront the lessons of the revolution. And just as President Lincoln recognized that, despite the horrors of the Civil War, the nation could come out the other side with an opportunity for "a new birth of freedom." An opportunity for its citizens to recommit and more closer to achieving the founders' sacred goal of forming "a more perfect Union." 

At 250, the United States faces questions strikingly familiar to those raised in the 1770s: Who holds political power? Who is accountable? What does liberty require? And what obligations come with self-rule?

By walking the ground where these questions first erupted and by revisiting the arguments that shaped a nation, we can better understand not only where we came from, but what is at stake now.

This series is an invitation: to learn, to question, and to recommit to the idea that the American Revolution was not the end of a struggle for democracy, but its beginning.

###

Meet Sean Smith, a master of conservation, adventure, and storytelling! This award-winning
conservationist and former National Park and Forest Ranger has trekked through the wilderness of Yellowstone, Glacier, Mount St. Helens, and the North Cascades, keeping nature safe with his trusty ranger hat and boots. But Sean's talents don't stop there. He's a TEDx speaker and even a private pilot.

But amidst all these adventures, Sean's heart beats for storytelling. He's been spinning tales since childhood, and now he writes thrilling national park novels that'll have you hooked from the first page. Imagine the drama and mystery of the mountains combined with the adrenaline of a rollercoaster ride. That's what you'll find in Sean's books, set against the majestic backdrop of Yellowstone, Gettysburg, and Mount Rainier. His most recent thriller is set in Glacier and will drop later this year.

So, if you're craving an escape into the wild, look no further. Grab a copy of Sean's novels and prepare for an unforgettable adventure. These stories will transport you to the heart of the national parks, where danger lurks and heroes rise. Don't miss out! Find all his captivating novels right here and in the QR code included. 

TAKE ACTION: Our National Parks Are at Risk: Call Your Senators Today!

The U.S. Senate is poised to vote on a dangerous amendment that could open the door to selling America’s national parks, the very places that define our history, culture, wildlife, and national identity.

Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) has introduced Amendment 3972 to the Interior Appropriations bill. This proposal would strip out longstanding legislative language that currently protects the National Park System from disposal and sale. If this amendment passes, it would send a clear and dangerous signal: that the federal government could sell off national parks to the highest bidder. 

What Amendment 3972 Would Do

Under current law, the Interior Department is required to retain ownership and operation of all National Park Service units, national historic trails, and wild and scenic rivers, ensuring these places remain public lands managed for future generations. Amendment 3972 would remove that requirement from the Interior Appropriations bill. 

That means:

• The Department of the Interior would no longer be legally bound to preserve all existing national park lands as federal land. 

• It would send a signal to the White House and Department of the Interior officials that selling or transferring park units is permissible. 

• National parks, battlefields, seashores, and historic sites, treasured by millions, could be at risk of privatization, transfer to state control, or outright sale.

In short: a vote for Amendment 3972 is a vote to weaken foundational protections for our national parks. 

Why This Matters to Every American

Our national parks are more than scenic landscapes; they are living history and economic engines:

• National parks preserve key parts of our heritage, from Revolutionary War battlefields to iconic geological wonders. 

• Parks deliver enormous economic value. According to the National Parks Conservation Association, for every $1 invested in the National Park Service, communities receive roughly $15 in economic return through jobs, tourism, and local spending. 

• Park tourism sustains local jobs and injects billions into state and local economies every year. 

This isn’t speculative; Americans across the political spectrum overwhelmingly support protecting public lands and national parks, not dismantling them. 

This Threat Is Real — And Happening Now

Advocacy groups, including the National Parks Conservation Association and Western Priorities, are sounding the alarm. If Senator Lee’s amendment passes, it would undermine crucial protections and be a major step toward privatizing land that belongs to all of us. 

We are weeks away from the 250th anniversary of the United States; there is no better time to protect our heritage than now.

Take Action: Call Your Senators Today

Please contact your U.S. Senators today and urge them to vote NO on Amendment 3972 to the Interior Appropriations bill.

Our parks are not for sale. They are not political bargaining chips. They are part of our national identity and legacy.

Here’s what you can tell your Senators when you write/call:

Hello, my name is _____ and I live in _____ (town/state). 

I am urging you to vote NO on Senator Mike Lee’s Amendment 3972 to the Interior Appropriations bill. 

This amendment would strip protections that keep national parks in public hands and could lead to their sale or transfer. Our national parks are treasured public lands that preserve our history and support local economies. 

Please protect them — vote NO. 

Thank you.

Now is the time to act. Pick up the phone, make the call, and tell your Senators that America’s national parks are not for sale.

###

Meet Sean Smith, a master of conservation, adventure, and storytelling! This award-winning
conservationist and former National Park and Forest Ranger has trekked through the wilderness of Yellowstone, Glacier, Mount St. Helens, and the North Cascades, keeping nature safe with his trusty ranger hat and boots. But Sean's talents don't stop there. He's a TEDx speaker and even a private pilot.

But amidst all these adventures, Sean's heart beats for storytelling. He's been spinning tales since childhood, and now he writes thrilling national park novels that'll have you hooked from the first page. Imagine the drama and mystery of the mountains combined with the adrenaline of a rollercoaster ride. That's what you'll find in Sean's books, set against the majestic backdrop of Yellowstone, Gettysburg, and Mount Rainier. His most recent thriller is set in Glacier and will drop later this year.

So, if you're craving an escape into the wild, look no further. Grab a copy of Sean's novels and prepare for an unforgettable adventure. These stories will transport you to the heart of the national parks, where danger lurks and heroes rise. Don't miss out! Find all his captivating novels right here and in the QR code included. 

Utah’s Bid to Co-Manage National Parks: Why the Nation Should Pay Close Attention

Rumors are swirling about an upcoming high-level meeting between the U.S. Department of the Interior and Utah’s elected officials. On the agenda, according to multiple sources, is a proposal for Utah to co-manage its five national parks: Arches, Bryce Canyon, Canyonlands, Capitol Reef, and Zion.

Advocates say this could give Utah “a stronger voice” in park operations. Critics worry the plan could open the door to state-level political interference, revenue-driven management, or even a slow erosion of the very principles that created the national park system in the first place.

Before this meeting happens, it’s worth remembering why America created national parks at all, why Congress placed them under federal, not state control, and what the law says about maintaining them as treasures held in trust for the entire American public.

A Brief History of a Radical American Idea

When Congress created Yellowstone National Park in 1872, it did something unprecedented in world history: it set aside land not for kings, nobles, or private entrepreneurs, but for “the benefit and enjoyment of the people.” All the people. Rich or poor. Local or distant. American or visiting traveler.

This radical democratic idea was driven by lived experience.

The American founders knew what it meant when land belonged to a monarch.

Under British rule, vast estates, forests, rivers, hunting grounds were controlled by the Crown or aristocrats. Common people were often excluded, fined, or imprisoned simply for crossing into lands they once used for food and freedom. The memory of privileged access to natural beauty, reserved only for those of status, stuck with early American thinkers.

The idea that a government could reserve extraordinary landscapes for the public good rather than elite pleasure was revolutionary.

The founders of the National Park System also knew what could happen without national protection.

In the mid-1800s, Niagara Falls was one of America’s most spectacular natural landmarks and yet nearly all of it was privatized. The shoreline was carved up by private landholders who built high walls, charged admission, erected cheap carnival attractions, ran high-wire acts over the gorge, and turned the area into a gaudy circus. Visitors complained that the commercial chaos ruined the natural majesty of the falls.

This exploitation deeply shaped national park visionaries thinking. When lawmakers considered the creation of the national park system, they explicitly referenced both European aristocratic models and the lesson of Niagara: if a natural wonder is left to private or local interests, the experience can be degraded, restricted, or lost entirely.

Why National Parks Are National

From Yellowstone onward, Congress created national parks to preserve America’s most extraordinary landscapes under national stewardship, not state or private control. Over time, courts have affirmed this arrangement.

Case Law Supporting Federal Management

Federal courts have consistently upheld the United States’ authority to create, manage, and regulate national parks and federal lands.

The Organic Act of 1916

The act that created the National Park Service directs the federal government:

“to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wildlife therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same…unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.”

The courts later described this mandate as a non-delegable federal responsibility.

Key Court Decisions Affirming National Control

• Camfield v. United States (1897)
  Upheld broad federal authority to prevent private or state interference with federal lands, even when regulating activities on adjacent non-federal property.

• Light v. United States (1911)
  Confirmed that the federal government may regulate and restrict uses of federal lands regardless of state preferences.

• United States v. Grimaud (1911)
  Held that Congress may delegate regulatory authority to federal agencies like the Department of Agriculture (later analogous to NPS) to manage federal lands. Importantly, the Court confirmed that federal agencies can issue binding regulations backed by criminal penalties—solidifying the legitimacy of federal land-management regulations generally.

• Kleppe v. New Mexico (1976)
  The Supreme Court declared that Congress’ power over federal public lands is “without limitations,” giving federal agencies supremacy when conflicts arise with state policies or laws.

• National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA) v. Stanton (D.D.C. 1998)
  A federal court held that the National Park Service must comply with the Organic Act’s conservation mandate and may not weaken protections to accommodate outside pressure. The ruling reinforced that park resources must be preserved unimpaired, and that NPS cannot delegate or dilute its statutory responsibilities.

Together, these decisions make clear:

Congress holds exclusive constitutional authority over national parks, and the National Park Service has a legal obligation to protect them according to national—not state—standards.

The Stakes of Utah’s Proposal

Utah has long had a complicated relationship with federal public lands. Some state leaders have pushed for greater state control, expanded development, or reduced federal regulation. Co-management, depending on form, could introduce:

• Revenue pressure overriding preservation

• State politics shaping visitor access

• Increased commercial development

• Conflicts over wildlife, water, and resource protection

• A precedent other states might emulate

Once the door opens, it may be difficult to close.

And it could return us, step by step, to the mistakes of Niagara—or the exclusionary systems the founders rejected.

National Parks Belong to the Nation

America’s national parks are protected by law, shaped by history, and treasured by generations. They were created precisely to prevent short-term interests from compromising long-term national values.

They belong not to Utah, not to Washington, D.C., and not to any administration.

They belong to all of us and to those who come after us.

A Call to Action

If you believe that America’s national parks should remain under strong national protection free from politicized co-management experiments now is the time to speak up.

Contact your senators and representatives. Tell them you oppose any arrangement that weakens national stewardship of national parks. Tell them to honor the legacy of Yellowstone’s founders, the lessons of Niagara, and the constitutional principle that these lands belong to the entire American public.

Utah’s proposal may be only a rumor today. But what happens in that room between Interior and Utah officials could shape the future of America’s greatest treasures.

###

Meet Sean Smith, a master of conservation, adventure, and storytelling! This award-winning
conservationist and former National Park and Forest Ranger has trekked through the wilderness of Yellowstone, Glacier, Mount St. Helens, and the North Cascades, keeping nature safe with his trusty ranger hat and boots. But Sean's talents don't stop there. He's a TEDx speaker and even a private pilot.

But amidst all these adventures, Sean's heart beats for storytelling. He's been spinning tales since childhood, and now he writes thrilling national park novels that'll have you hooked from the first page. Imagine the drama and mystery of the mountains combined with the adrenaline of a rollercoaster ride. That's what you'll find in Sean's books, set against the majestic backdrop of Yellowstone, Gettysburg, and Mount Rainier. His most recent thriller is set in Glacier and will drop later this year.

So, if you're craving an escape into the wild, look no further. Grab a copy of Sean's novels and prepare for an unforgettable adventure. These stories will transport you to the heart of the national parks, where danger lurks and heroes rise. Don't miss out! Find all his captivating novels right here and in the QR code included. 

What a Shutdown Does to Our Parks: Overflowing Bins, Fragile Landscapes, and Strained Gateways

When Congress lets funding lapse, America’s National Parks don’t simply “pause.” They fray out loud and in public. As of October 23, 2025, we’re more than three weeks into a federal shutdown, and many parks remain nominally open with minimal staff. The combination of open gates and closed services creates predictable problems on the ground, ecological harm that can take years to repair, and real economic pain for gateway towns that depend on managed, not chaotic, park traffic.

What visitors are actually seeing

• Restrooms and trash: With rangers furloughed and custodial contracts paused, restrooms close or go uncleaned, and trash piles up. That’s not hypothetical; these were signature failures in past shutdowns, and they’re recurring now. Expect closed visitor centers, suspended fee collection, sporadic trash pickup, and unmaintained roads and campgrounds.

• Safety & rule compliance: Skeleton crews can’t keep up with crowds. This month, Yosemite’s limited staff has been swamped by surging visitation, with reports of illegal base jumping, unauthorized camping, and swimming in closed areas, exactly what happens when enforcement and education are thin.

Ecological and cultural resource impacts

We’ve seen this movie before. During the record 2018–2019 shutdown, vandals carved rocks, drove off-road through fragile habitat, chopped Joshua trees for illegal camp pads, and left human waste. Former leaders warned that some damage could take centuries to heal. Those same pressure points are in play again today.

• Fragile soils & vegetation: Desert crusts and alpine meadows can be crushed by a single illegal vehicle track; repeated hits become lasting scars.

• Wildlife disturbance: Overflow crowds and dispersed, poorly supervised camping increase human–wildlife conflict, with knock-on effects during migration and breeding seasons.

• Cultural sites at risk: With fewer eyes on the landscape, looting and vandalism spike—damage to petroglyphs, mission-era structures, and historic features is notoriously hard to undo.

The National Park Service’s current contingency plan underscores the problem: only limited, essential functions continue during a lapse; most visitor services and resource management are suspended.

The economic hit to gateway communities

Parks are not just scenery; they’re economic engines. In 2024 alone, park visitors spent about $29 billion in gateway communities, supporting roughly 340,000 jobs and generating $56.3 billion in national economic output. When a shutdown disrupts managed access, closing visitor centers, canceling programs, scaring off visitors for a weekend or a week, the ripple is immediate for hotels, outfitters, restaurants, gas stations, guides, and seasonal workers.

This October, the National Parks Conservation Association estimates parks are losing about $1 million a day in fee revenue, funds that otherwise pay for trail repairs, restrooms, and safety projects. That’s money parks won’t have when the doors fully reopen.

Local news from Texas to California highlights the bind: towns that just posted record spending from park tourism now face cancellations, confusion, or unmanaged surges that strain services and dull the long-term visitor experience those economies rely on.

Community stopgaps and the double-edged sword

States and local partners often step in when the federal government shuts down. Utah announced its “Mighty 5” will remain open with limited services; Arizona and others have previously put up state funds to keep marquee parks staffed at a basic level. Volunteers organize trash pickups and restock toilet paper. Philanthropic groups help with signage and information.

These stopgaps matter, but they cut both ways:

• Upside: They reduce immediate harm to resources, keep essential services running, and help small businesses survive.

• Downside: They risk normalizing a dangerous narrative: “If locals, states, or donors can handle this, why not turn the parks over to the states or even private ventures?” Opponents of federal public-land management point to patched-together shutdown operations as proof that private operators or states could do better. That argument ignores the core Park Service mission, the long-term, science-based stewardship of national treasures and the economies of scale and consistency that a national system requires.

What you can do today 

1. Call your Senators, Representative, and the Department of the Interior. 

    a. Urge them to completely close the National Parks during the shutdown. This is tough to ask, but closing the parks is necessary. Leaving them open without adequate staffing is a slow-motion loss of the very resources we love. Stress that protecting natural and cultural treasures must be paramount, or we risk losing the very values and resources the parks are supposed to protect.

Bottom line

Leaving parks “open” without staffing is not a win for access; it’s a slow-motion loss of the very resources and communities we love. The fix isn’t heroic volunteerism or state lottery stopgaps, it’s Congress doing its job so rangers can do theirs. Until then, the most patriotic thing we can do as concerned citizens is to urge Congress and the Department of the Interior to shut the parks until the budget debate is settled and the federal government re-opens.

###

Meet Sean Smith, a master of conservation, adventure, and storytelling! This award-winning
conservationist and former National Park and Forest Ranger has trekked through the wilderness of Yellowstone, Glacier, Mount St. Helens, and the North Cascades, keeping nature safe with his trusty ranger hat and boots. But Sean's talents don't stop there. He's a TEDx speaker and even a private pilot.

But amidst all these adventures, Sean's heart beats for storytelling. He's been spinning tales since childhood, and now he writes thrilling national park novels that'll have you hooked from the first page. Imagine the drama and mystery of the mountains combined with the adrenaline of a rollercoaster ride. That's what you'll find in Sean's books, set against the majestic backdrop of Yellowstone, Gettysburg, and Mount Rainier. His most recent thriller is set in Glacier and will drop later this year.

So, if you're craving an escape into the wild, look no further. Grab a copy of Sean's novels and prepare for an unforgettable adventure. These stories will transport you to the heart of the national parks, where danger lurks and heroes rise. Don't miss out! Find all his captivating novels right here and in the QR code included.