You might be more willing if you see it as a kind of reciprocity, your part in a scheme which allows you to hike or otherwise relax on land other than your own.

And even if you never set foot on other's people property, I think it's fair of the government, which ultimately enforces land owners' property rights, to say that they won't support you excluding other people from natural land.

Honestly in the US it has never been a problem since there is so much land. The laws are also unambiguous here. If I’m on someone’s property I can get shot but on public land we can shoot each other :)

I have to admit that Americans seem to have a different perspective on land use, with the sheer scale of the country and a willingness to drive for hours to get places. If someone told me that I have to travel from Prague to Germany to go hiking or even just let my kids play in a forest, I'd be pretty mad.

In rural areas many Americans can go on a hike or play in the forest in their backyard.

Most Americans live in urban areas, though.

I have to say that according to this PDF I found [1], a lot more US families do own forested land, but it's still a minority.

[1]: https://web.archive.org/web/20250420022718/http://www.family...

The pattern around me is that the kind of people who ignore trespassing signs also ignore fire bans.