As I often copy & pastepost in this subreddit such as in this recent thread, it was likely that medieval Norse settlers in Greenland did not primarily value the location as well as the resources found in now US as attractive as those in Greenland, where it was far closer to the European market, with many exotic animals and bird (and their products) highly valued there.

is the stone found in no man’s land with an inscription

If one cited in this article is the stone you mentioned above, almost every aspects of the carving suggest it was not authentic or very, very highly doubtful for the carvings of the alleged 11th century Greenlanders:

• The transmission of runic inscriptions from the western part of Norse colonies in the North Atlantic Isles, especially their early ones (before about 1200 CE) is not so common.
• horizontal, multi lines layout (just as the document written in the parchment!) on the stone is in fact much rarer than generally supposed, at least before 1100.
• The rune stone with AD dating from the early 11th century? The closest example is this Kuli Stone, even which only states that: 'Þórir and Hallvarðr raised this stone in memory of Ulfljótr(?) ... Christianity had been twelve winters in Norway ...'. The alleged reading of '1001' also depends on the Roman numeral alphabet 'M (=1,000)', which is also extremely highly unlikely that any of the Norse voyagers on the coast would have been familiar with its usage (also it may worth pointing out here that the oldest extant document from medieval Scandinavia (with AD dating) only dates back to 1085 CE - the original is even later, only back to 1135).
• 'Liif (Leif) Irikson (Erikson)'? What is the point of mentioning the carver's name in full name, as well as without -r (nominative form of Old Norse sonr)?. The majority of the runic corpus in late Viking Age Scandinavia only names the personal name of the carver/ commissioner.