Wilderness Waters: A Book That Touched My Heart

 

The final line of Norman Maclean’s epic short story, A River Runs Through It, is, “I am haunted by waters.” I turned 71 last week, and more and more I find that is the case with me as well. If you look at my bookshelf there are books that confirm this, with names like Calling After Water, Healing Waters, The Voice of Rivers, Ernest Hemingway’s Big Two Hearted River, John N. Maclean’s Home Waters, (which I love) and my most recent, Wilderness Waters by Steve Osterholzer, which I also quickly grew to love.

Wilderness Waters is a deeply introspective look at the author’s long-standing love for and exploration of northern Minnesota’s Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. I was drawn to the book by its description in a book review I read in one of the flyfishing magazines I receive every quarter, and also by the comments on the cover by John Eldredge, a Christian pastor, best-selling author, and leader whom I respect. The book is subtitled, “adventures paddling & fishing the wilderness.” That also drew me in, right there. It took me a while, due to work and other obligations, to get around to reading the book, but over Labor Day weekend, faced with my third surgery on my left foot in four years the following Wednesday, my wife and I went camping on the Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest. My happy place. I almost couldn’t put the book down. It didn't just draw me in, it grabbed hold of me, and didn’t let go until the last page. Now, I am haunted by Wilderness Waters.

There are many, many quotable lines in Steve’s book. Probably the first one I made note of is in the chapter explaining the what and the why of the Boundary Waters. He says, “You’ll find quiet here. But not just quiet surrounding you – you’ll find quiet within you. You’ll discover needs you may not even know you had. A need for adventure. Exploration. To minimize.. To think. Listen. To discover what’s truly essential in your life.” That’s deep, and some of the chapters are deep like that. Some of them are quite funny, like his adventures with his wife he calls the “perfect paddling partner,” or his wilderness latrine rating system. Others describe the gamut of emotions he experiences in the wilderness, particularly during solo expeditions. He talks about fear, courage, and the awakening of his senses to the natural world that he’s paddling through.

I could go on and on about this book. But suffice it to say, it touched my heart. It touched my spirit. There are parts I could identify strongly with, and others that caused me to sit back and think how I would approach the situation he describes. But the best thing I can tell you about Wilderness Waters is, buy it, read it. Meditate on it. I think you’ll love it. I do. I am haunted by waters, Wilderness Waters.

Conundrum: Caught in the Horns of a Dilemma

I admit to being caught in the horns of a dilemma. What do you do when a politician that you don’t care for makes a good proposal that would greatly benefit persons with disabilities and their ability to access the backcountry for sport and recreation? Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) introduced the Outdoor Americans with Disabilities Act which would enable and empower persons with physical limitations access to our vast backcountry and wilderness areas using the mobility assistive equipment that helps them in their daily activities. If you’ve seen my previous posts, you know that I am no big fan of Senator Lee, however this does seem to be a step in the right direction. And, if you have followed this blog for any period of time, you know that I have advocated for allowing e-bikes to utilize the same trails as their non-electric counterparts, even though I do not own one. Yet.

At the same time, the Trump administration and the Department of Agriculture have proposed rescinding the “roadless area rule” which places serious restrictions on roadways in our national forests, parks, and BLM land. The rule has served a valid purpose, and continues to do so, but when viewed through the viewpoint of the above-mentioned legislation, it gives me pause, and it should give you pause also. Probably the best response to this proposal that I have seen comes from the website of the Blue Ribbon Coalition, and access advocacy organization based in Colorado. They quote the leader of the veterans organization, and said:

"Without motorized access, those with special needs and disabilities - including many veterans - will not have access to public lands because they do not have the ability to hike, jump on a bike, or ride a horse. Motorized vehicles are essentially an extension of their body; it’s their legs to enjoy the same great outdoors that able-bodied citizens can enjoy. If you eliminate motorize access to public lands then you take out two user groups that have zero chance to ever experience these public lands. These user groups are not asking to forge new trails, they just want to keep existing routes and trails open so that they can get the same therapeutic experience from nature that able-bodied citizens have access to. At Trail Hero we have had over 5000 veterans and over 1000 people with special needs join us on trails….” - Rich Klein - President/Founder, Trail Hero (Emphasis by myself.)

Organizations that I belong to and support such as Trout Unlimited and Backcountry Hunters and Anglers are actively campaigning against the rescission of the roadless rule, joined by a vast number of advocacy and wilderness organizations. On the other hand, there are groups like the Blue Ribbon Coalition, Outdoor Access Initiative, and a myriad of off-road vehicle organizations that feel the other way. I have openly disagreed with BHA’s position on e-bikes since it was first published several years ago, and with the US Forest Service policy that decided that e-bikes are motorized vehicles. The BRC’s position on roadless areas is much more in line with my own position that Type I (pedal assisted) electric mountain bikes are bicycles first, with the electric motor simply assisting in peddling, and should therefore be allowed on all trails which are open to mountain bikes.

Any time a trail is shut down or restricted for any reason, somebody’s access is going to be cut off. Admittedly, some of these restrictions are necessary for safety, habitat protection, or administrative purposes. However, public lands are supposed to be accessible to all Americans, including those with disabilities, impairments, or mobility issues. As a seventy-one-year-old who’s next bike will very likely be an E-bike, and who has endured three foot and leg surgeries over the past four years (the most recent of which was only last week) I see the need for open trails, logging roads, and other pathways (where safe, of course) that will provide access for me and people like myself to continue to enjoy our Public Lands unimpaired. So, I will continue to ride my Cogburn fat-bike as long as I physically can, or until the land managers change their policy and my yet to be purchased e-bike can be ridden legally on the same trails the Cogburn is. Therefore, I give qualified support to the rescission of the roadless rule, hoping that the land managers will be judicious and careful in their application of their new authority if and when it occurs.

 

 

This Land was Saved for You and Me!

This land was saved for you and me! Thank you, @backcountryhunters @troutunlimited @thetrcp @outdoor_life @outdooralliance @fieldandstream @outdoorindustry and all the other non-profits, all the businesses that stepped up to stand alongside us, and everyone who called, wrote, emailed, showed up. A special shoutout to @quietkat_ebike for taking a stand when none of your competitors would. It won't be forgotten. Keep vigilant, my friends. The battle may be over, but the war goes on.

CALL to Action!

Call YOUR Senators on June 25, 2025!

The Senate wants to sell off up to 3.2 million acres of OUR public lands—lands that belong to the American people. This isn’t a housing solution. It’s a land grab. And on June 25, we’re standing united to stop it. 

As part of our United We Stand for Public Lands campaign, BHA is calling on 25,000 public land owners to take action in a single day. 

We’ve already mobilized more than 66,000 messages and calls since this campaign launched—and we’ve seen as many as 10,000 actions taken in one day. With your help, we’ll flood Senate offices with a message they can’t ignore: Our public lands are not for sale. 

 

WHO: Public land owners (that’s you!) 

WHAT: 📞 Call. Email. Raise hell.  

WHEN: 🗓️ Wednesday, June 25, 2025

 

HOW To Participate: 

✅ Visit the BHA Action Center: https://www.backcountryhunters.org/take_action#/487 

✅ Provide your zipcode to call and email your Senators direct from our site

✅ Share the Action Alert URL and event day graphic on social 

✅ Post with #UnitedWeStandForPublicLands #PublicLandOwner and tag @backcountryhunters 

 

The math is simple: 60 seconds. One message. 25,000 voices. 

Phone the United States Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121. A switchboard operator will connect you directly with the Senate office you request.

 

For public lands. 

WHEN

June 25, 2025 at 9:00am - 11:59pm

 

Our National Forests Are Under Attack, and Nobody is Even Talking About It!

 

You read that headline correctly. Our National Forests are under attack by forces that seek to dissolve the US Forest Service that manages them, and sell off our precious Public Lands to private interests that would seek to pillage them for their valuable resources, and/or limit access to those who can afford to pay their access fees. If you think I am deluded, pay attention, because while social media is full of pleas to save our national parks, nobody is paying attention to the National Forests. Although it has escaped media attention that the Park Service has regained multiple thousands of positions, the US Forest Service has lost 10,000 jobs, and is being told to eliminate another 7000 with little or no regard for its effects on families, homes, and the  economy or the communities and states they live in. Make no mistake about it, a cabal of primarily Western state senators and representatives, emboldened by the election of President Trump and his DOGE program under Elon Musk, are quietly clearcutting the caretakers of over one hundred and eighty-eight million acres of Public Land. OUR Public Lands.

Nobody is arguing that our national parks, the sanctuaries of our most unique natural, cultural, and historical lands, aren’t important, however it takes a lot more to shut down a national park than to do so with National Forest lands. To eliminate as much as thirty percent of the Forest Service workforce will place Irreparable harm on an agency that was already short-staffed before they were ordered to eliminate 7500 primarily seasonal positions last fall, followed by a 3000-employee cut on Valentine’s Day. This is being done behind our backs, folks. While your attention is being focused justifiably and intentionally on things like USAID, Social Security, DEI, and National Parks, the Forest Service is being reduced to a force that cannot possibly keep up with the demands of managing the Public Lands in their care. Those trying to destroy the agency will seize this opportunity to say, “Look, we told you so! They can’t manage it so let’s transfer it to the states.” Then, when the states can’t afford to manage it, they’ll be forced to sell the lands off to the highest bidder. That is the endgame. If you don’t think this threat is real, witness that in January the Supreme Court ruled against a Utah-based attempt to seize federal lands in that state, just one in a string of attempts to wrest control of federal lands managed for us under the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management in primarily, but not exclusively Western states.

While I certainly agree that government at all levels, but particularly at the federal level, has become bloated and rift with corruption and special interests that need to be eliminated, and a budget and massive deficit that need to be reduced, the US Forest Service is one of the best managers of both the taxpayer’s dollars entrusted to them and the land that it is their mission to manage. Selling off our Public Lands at fire sale prices will not effectively reduce the budget or the deficit. Selling off the timber on those lands while laying off the trained, educated, professional employees whose job it is to manage sustainable forests is both shortsighted and ultimately counterproductive. One of the Forest Service’s biggest problems is its historic inability to promote and lobby for itself. Many people in this country don’t even recognize the difference between a National Park and a National Forest, or that they are under two different, separate departments of the federal government with vastly different missions.

Unfortunately, the days of representative government are receding rapidly in our rearview mirrors. Party leaders on both sides of the aisle demand that senators and representatives vote their party line whether or not it is what the people who elected those representatives want or believe in. Both sides believe we, who sent them to Washington in the first place, are not smart enough to know what’s best for us. There needs to be a new way to reinforce the fact that the people we elect are there to represent us and our interests, not those of their biggest donors. Because of this, contacting your legislators may be only partially effective. But letter writing, emails, and phone calls have worked to restore over 3000 positions with the National Park Service. There is more to be done, but we need to get at it because there is the deadline of March 13th for the Forest Service to produce 7000 more cuts. Write, call, post, email. Make a ruckus. Let your and my elected representatives know that this has to stop. Tell them to end the attack on OUR Public Lands, OUR National Forests, before it’s too late to save them!

Public Lands Firings: A Little Order to Chaos

 

Let's try and bring a little clarity to this very disturbing issue; First, there are three agencies that took major hits frrom the DOGE cuts, the National Park Service, the Bureau of Land Management, (both of which are in the Department of the Interior) and the US Forest Service, of the Department of Agriculture. Second, the Trump administration is not planning to close any national parks. The parks will stay open, however will have reduced staffing and services. Last night, WCCO indicated, and I have seen this elsewhere as well, that the administration was already going to allow the rehire of law enforcement and some seasonal positions. The news report wasn't specific to the Park Service or Forest Service, but I am assuming it was the NPS since their interviewee was a laid-off interp Ranger. What they are planning to look at is every National Monument dating all the way back to when Theodore Roosevelt designated the first one, to determine their "viability." National monuments are made by Executive Order. National Parks, Battlefields, Historic Sites, Etc. are designated by Congress. That being said, our National Forests are under a far greater threat than our National Parks. We have a Congress, both the Senate and the House, that are very anti-public lands, and they feel that if they can gut the United States Forest Service, they'll be able to prove that the USFS (and by default the BLM) can't manage the resource and it should be turned over to the states. Of course, the states can't afford to manage it either, so it would then be sold off to the highest bidder. That is the endgame. If you hunt, fish, hike, camp, ski, ride ATVs, in other words, recreate on our federal public lands, your access to those places is threatened; threatened by staff reductions, threatened by greedy speculators and developers, threatened by a non-sympathetic Congress. The Trump administration is not the end of the world as we know it, any more than the Biden, Obama, or Bush administrations were. The pursestrings rest in the hands of our elected representatives, and that's who we need to win over to supporting our public lands. Big donors bring big bucks to their reelection campaign, but each person only has one vote. Your calls count, your emails count, your mail letters count, your presence at public hearings counts, and your vote counts. We are Public Land Owners and we vote. We vote for those representatives who support, and fund our land management agencies.

Before you go posting rumors and blatantly false information on Facebook, X, Instagram, etc., verify whether it's true or not. Yes, there is a problem, but don't make it worse by spreading false information.

Join the Fight to Save Our National Forests!

My name is Hans Erdman, and I am a retired park ranger, Patrol Chief Emeritus of the Minnesota and Wisconsin volunteer Backcountry Trail Patrol Association, host of the Old Ranger’s Backcountry podcast and a number of blogs, pages, and other conservation related presence across social media. I am also a proud United States Forest Service volunteer and have been for the past thirty-five years, even while working as a career park ranger for other agencies.

Today, February 1st, is the 120^th anniversary of the establishment of the United States Forest Service under the Department of Agriculture, by President Theodore Roosevelt in 1905. I am posting this short message today, not just because of the Forest Service anniversary, but because this year, possibly more than any year since, our national forests, grasslands, and even our national parks are under attack. They are under attack from the same forces that Teddy Roosevelt and it's first Chief, Gifford Pinchot sought to protect our public lands from in 1905.

I am a life-long conservative, by every definition of the word. I am not a Republican nor a Democrat, but I will always vote for the person, regardless of affiliation, who most closely supports the things that I believe in. Do not even dare to accuse me of being anything but conservative. I was supporting Ronald Reagan when most of today’s legislators were still in diapers back in 1968. But I am also a conservationist and have been so even longer, when I decided my goal in life was to become the career that I lived and loved for twenty-six years as a Ranger. And I also believe that our government at both the state and federal level has become too big, too unwieldy, and too intrusive in our daily lives. It has also become too expensive for its own system to support. That much I can agree on with those who were attacking our public lands, however there is a group in Congress that is using the new administration’s push to reduce government spending as justification to gut our land management partners, specifically the US Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management. During the first Trump administration, the same representatives from Utah and other Western states attempted to eliminate the division of law enforcement and investigations within the Forest Service, and even in the past month the Supreme Court of the United States ruled against another Utah-based lawsuit that tried to force the BLM to transfer the lands it manages in the beehive state to state control. These attacks have continued, and they always seem to originate with the Utah and Nevada delegations.

Our public lands in the United States are a unique and incredibly special heritage. No other country in the world has lands that are owned by us, the public, and allows access to those lands like our country does. Our national forests and grasslands comprise of 193 million acres that contribute over thirteen billion dollars to the national economy every year from forest visitors alone. Over 20 percent of our nation’s clean water supply comes from the more than 400,000 lakes and 60,000 miles of rivers and streams on national forest land. Most of those nearly 200 million acres are open to hunting, fishing, hiking, camping, bicycling, ATV riding, horseback riding, and myriads of other recreational opportunities. The Forest Service provides, excuse me, provided 7400 seasonal jobs that contributed to the local economy until last year when Congress drastically cut funding for seasonal employment. This argument of trimming the budget is a thinly veiled disguise. Their real intent is to eliminate both our public lands, and the agencies that manage so that they can be supposedly managed better by the respective, and most frequently western, states. Of course, those states do not have the budget, the manpower, or in many cases the training or desire to do so, and failing that, they would be forced to sell to the highest bidder. That is who these champions of budget reduction actually represent, those “highest bidders.”

Representative Emmer, for twenty-six years I worked as a park ranger in your district. Representative Stauber, I live in your district and have voted for you every time you’ve run for Congress, but if you choose to take sides with those who would steal our public lands and our unique American Heritage of wild and public places from us, I will add my voice to those who oppose you. In 1984 I stood toe to toe with Governor Mario Cuomo when he tried to cut New York State’s Forest Ranger force, which I believe is one of the finest forest protection agencies in the world, in half because his downstate advisors told him they weren’t needed anymore. We won that battle, and, now as then, we’ll win this one.

I leave you with my favorite quote from one of my conservation heroes, the first chief of the United States Forest Service, Gifford Pinchot; “Where conflicting interests must be reconciled, the question shall always be answered from the standpoint of the greatest good of the greatest number in the long run.”

We are the greatest number. Contact your members of Congress, contact your senators. As the song says, “This land is your land, this land is my land, this land was made for you and me.” Without your help, this land won’t be yours or mine or our grandchildren’s in the long run, if we don’t act now.

To paraphrase Smokey Bear, “Only you can protect our forests!”