"where they are left open and unenclosed and no act of government forbids this use"

First of all, Buford v. Houtz was an easement case dealing with sheep trampling over private land on the way to graze on public land.

Second, the quote above is conditional.  If a land is not left open and unenclosed, or if a government action forbids a particular use, then the land is no longer free.  Multiple acts have been passed since 1890, most importantly the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, that regulate grazing on public lands and requires ranchers to pay a fee for those rights.

In other words, the case you just quoted was superseded by an act of Congress, and therefore by its own language goes directly against the point you were trying to make.