Well, I don't see "property rights" being a logical extension of personal sovereignty for any case. Certainly a rhetorical extension. As in "Who is allowed to build a fence around XY? And allowed by whom?" While XY can be lots of things like sources of water, meadow lands et cetera, all addressing territory. Yes, I agree, that some territory might be fenced, yet not as a logical extension of someone's sovereignty.

Unfortunately this is something that is seldomly addressed by freedom loving people. There's put rhetoric often to be logic while it's not. Some is logic, yes. But some is not. Where's the grey line?