[sojournerc]

So are you proposing building houses on national forest? National parks?

The vast majority of federal land is BLM, which by its very nature is not desirable for development.

I could go camp on BLM land today in eastern Colorado, it just wouldn't be very nice, because it's scrub brush all the way to Kansas City (exaggerating, only slightly).

Go camp for a month on BLM land somewhere and see if it's a place you'd like to build a town.

Otherwise you're proposing building on protected public lands which I for one would prefer to remain natural.

You can still homestead parts of Alaska. If you can develop the land it's yours to keep, and I do imagine that the feds let go BLM land on occasion, but it's not going to solve housing as suggested up-thread.