why is the property registered at all on the State Registry if it is not part of that closed law boundary?

The whole facility of government is to serve and benefit the people, it is the creation and servant of the people. Keeping records is a legitimate function of a servant. Also the State (people) do have an interest in making sure land is not abandoned, or it may become unusable forever. The States were created in common law. In common law (never mind the Law itself developed under a monarchy), the owner has full dominion over his property (other than maybe the kind, which we ain't got). Though what I write may be true, in reality, it probably is better not record the property, but it simply should not have to be that way since the rights of the people are constitutionally protected as the existed in common law. 'I object! I have made no such agreement' should put an end, or at least call into question every bit of it.