"Federally controlled land" in the West is generally open to the public and is better referred to as public land. When land is given to the state, it is often no longer available for public access. The states use it as an additional source of revenue from leasing out mineral rights, agriculture use, etc. Their argument is federal land deprives them of property tax revenue. A counter argument is there is no cost to the state because the fed pays for infrastructure and there is no population on the land using state services. The state benefits from tourism dollars from hunters to hikers that use public land.
This is pitched as a political issue but only because so many are not informed, particularly those who live in the east and are not familiar with recreation options on public land. I wasn't not aware at all until I learned of boondocking and really until I moved to AZ and learned about hunting on public land.
This is an issue that is starting to unite folks from opposite ends of political spectrum. Hikers, mountain bikers, and hunters all have a shared interest in keeping public land open even if hikers and hunters have often disagreed. (Yes, it's possible to like both - I do. But the REI crowd and Cabellas crowd are generally a different demographic)
Checkerboard land is what needs to be fixed. That is when public land is surrounded by private land and the private land owners are not required to give passage including stepping across a corner boundary from one square of public land to another never stepping a foot on private land. Much of the checkerboard land is in elk hunting country and public land used by private outfitters who own adjacent private land.
