>>1736411Because they are mostly quite densely populated areas, and "wild" forest barely exist anymore, so they want to protect what little they have left. Most are managed for timber, too, so there's an economic priority.
You can enjoy the outdoors, they just set limits on what you can do. Imagine if every antisocial shit stain eurotrash felt free to drag cases of beer and potato chips in their nearest innawoods.
(That said, it's not hard to get away with stealth camping if you do it carefully and and respectfully, and choose the right area. I've gone at least a couple kilometres off trail, but the problem in most areas is that you'll often bump into other roads, farms, etc)
And it's not so much that they specifically want you stay inside, etc. It's that they (politicians, general public) are usually out of touch with wilderness (such as it exists), so they view it as something scary, rare, exotic, that needs to desperately saved (not wrong) and so never be touched, like some museum exhibit of an gold jewel encrusted goblet from a few centuries ago behind glass, meant only to be looked at from a distance. This produces yet more disconnect from nature.
