Consider the east coast where almost all is private--you cannot hike anywhere, it is all fenced off. Private owners control everything and you might as well be in the city as to be in the "country".
In recent times, from what I am reading, it’s the BLM and USFS that are closing off public land use.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=forest+service+closing+off+trails
States should be in charge not fedgov. It is ridiculous how much control they have over land out west.
Wrong.
Hiking North Carolina, 2nd: A Guide to Nearly 500 of North Carolina's Greatest Hiking Trails (State Hiking Guides Series)
Not so at all, at least in the state where I reside.
I live in Maine, and people hike, hunt and fish on private land all the time, including land that my family owns.
People are supposed to have permission from the landowner, but hunting, fishing and other outdoor pursuits occur anyway. It’s tradition, and rarely does anyone make a fuss about the use of their land.
People who object to the use of their private land post the property. Some people do that, but most do not.
The timber and paper companies also own vast stretches of woods in northern Maine, and they allow public access for a variety of outdoor pursuits.
There are also numerous nature conservation groups in Maine that allow public use of the land under their control.
Consider it is not the governments charter to falsely persecute, harass, and unjustly convict citizens. The people who should be in jail are the stalking, harassing, and extorting personnel of the FWS and the BLM. I would also include the prosecutor, the judge and any of their minions I could round up. After reading your post 35 I know who the idiot is and which side of tyranny you are on.
Constitutionally speaking, the federal government has no authority to hold massive amounts of land in perpetutity.
I'm not so sure where you were, but aside from the Shenandoah National Forest, the George Washington National Forest, The Appalachian Trail, Smoky Mountain National Park and a host of other wildlife areas and government owned lands, there were plenty of places to go tramping around in the boonies without messing with private property.
Consider the 20 acre remnant of land which has been in our family for over 350 years, still farmed, but on which our family cannot (by government decree) cut trees planted by an ancestor 180 years ago because those acres were not good farmland, and you can go walk elsewhere. We can't even harvest that crop (hardwood--worth millions).
What you don't seem to get is that for a farmer or rancher, that land is our factory.
You wouldn't go traipsing through an auto assembly line or a steel mill, what makes you think you can just stomp through a field of hay or cropland, or go crashing through pasture or a woodlot?
Even worse, if you get hurt, if a bull gores you, you get hurt climbing a fence, the landowner gets taken for a ride.
It is enough to avoid the inherent dangers of farming and ranching if you know what you are doing, but to have to assume liability for every idiot who gets a notion to go for a walk on your land is over the top.
Keeping livestock in is the primary purpose of gates and fences, but keeping idiots out is a definite plus. Farming and ranching comes up number 9 on the list of most dangerous jobs, and having the clueless wandering about is a recipe for disaster.
As for closing down roads, it was the BLM trying to shut down county roads to limit access to water these people had rights to.
Water rights amount to ownership of the use of water; that ownership is vital to the use of the property (control the water, control the land) out west.