Lockean property question

[afterzir]

People like Kinsella, Hoppe, Locke, etc.

have talked about how to own items.

(I haven't gone that much into depth though)

 

But I haven't really heard how to lose ownership (if that's possible).

Does ruining/neglecting items forfeit your ownership?

(I'm more interested with ruining than neglecting) 

[Mister Mister]

Why is this important? 
Can you give an example of a situation where this would be an issue?

 

The only things I can think of, is that in some Common Law traditions, once a claim has been staked on a land, the claimstaker has a limited amount of time to develop before the land returns to being un-owned.  Similarly, there are "squatting" laws, where if you live somewhere for long enough, even if someone else has a claim, the ownership transfers to you.

Ruining your own property doesn't forfeit anything.  But if exercise of your property ruins someone else's property, you may owe them restitution.

[afterzir]

An example would be how top soil is being eroded by some farms (I'm not an expert though)

 

My attention has shifted somewhat to Locke's proviso (I haven't heard of it until yesterday)

Does anyone know some counters to a monopoly forming by way of mass acquisitions?

[labmath2]

The only things I can think of, is that in some Common Law traditions, once a claim has been staked on a land, the claimstaker has a limited amount of time to develop before the land returns to being un-owned. Similarly, there are "squatting" laws, where if you live somewhere for long enough, even if someone else has a claim, the ownership transfers to you.

 

Why should you be obliged to develop your land lest it become soneone else's land? It intuitively srmeems fishy.

 

The second one is just encouraging trespassing.

[Thomasio]

A good example for ruining ownership may be the dams put into a river by one country, which ruins the land of the countries further down the river.

I.e. the Aswan dam in the Nile, or the Turkish dams in Euphrates and Tigris.