Historic Lighthouse. Bad Appeal Decision
Nauuticca-ING
Posts: 2 ✭
Hello,
I am looking to share my feedback to Niantic in the hopes this appeal result can be overturned, as recommended in the November 2023 AMA.
The nomination in question is the historic Stratford Shoal Lighthouse. It is located on a small island in the middle of the Long Island Sound. Built in 1877, it remains an important nautical landmark and promotes exploration today. The year "1877" is embedded in the stonework on the side of the lighthouse tower.
It was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1990, shown at the link below.
https://catalog.archives.gov/id/132353507
The lighthouse has an entry in Google Maps (albeit slightly misplaced):
It shows other images of this nearly 150-year-old lighthouse that several other adventurous explorers have taken personally.
Since Google Maps satellite imagery does not capture this small island in the water, the location of the lighthouse can be verified using the NRHP document that shows 41° 03' 36.0" N, 73° 06' 06.0" W, which is 41.060000, -73.101667. This is only a few feet away from my proposed nomination location at 41.060031,-73.101692. The whole island is probably 150-200 feet across too.
My supporting image shows that the lighthouse can be directly accessed by pedestrian via a boat or kayak since a pedestrian platform with a railing takes a visitor from the shoreline to structure. The railing completely encircles the lighthouse.
Additional images showing the full extent of the lighthouse and island, from the link above:
Wikipedia entry for this lighthouse:
Now I'd like to discuss what NianticCasey said once when this topic came up. "A lighthouse on a small island that is only accessible by boat / ferry would be eligible if there's a public dock or some other way for players to approach on foot once they've docked." - NianticCasey
Lighthouse nominations, such as this one, promote exploration and help explorers discover interesting real-world locations in accordance with Niantic mission. Below are some other interesting examples of similar lighthouses I found:
- Execution Rocks Lighthouse (40.878059,-73.737604) -- Great name!
- Stepping Stones Lighthouse (40.824293,-73.774773)
- Greens Ledge Lighthouse (41.041623,-73.443892)
- Pecks Ledge Light (41.077337,-73.369835)
- Penfield Reef Lighthouse (41.117114,-73.222105)
- Falkner Island Lighthouse (41.212683,-72.653849)
All of the wayspots above are found in the Long Island Sound. The threshold for safe pedestrian access is the following according to Niantic: "Remote nominations, such as those on mountain tops or on small islands, are acceptable if they can safely be accessed on foot." Without an adjustment to my appeal, I do not foresee the community of explorers or another Niantic reviewer to accept this valid nomination in the future.
Thank you for your time.
Comments
A month after this was originally posted, a Ingress agent died kayaking home from a tiny island wayspot. Niantic hasn't been very supportive of tiny island wayspots since then. Don't get your hopes up.
The location of this submission does not meet our criteria "Safe Access" and as a result, we stand by our decision to reject the Wayspot.
Okay, thanks for that. But… …what is the reason underpinning that conclusion?
It's fine when someone raises a nomination and everyone familiar with Wayfarer can glance at it and say: "There's no pedestrian access." or "It's on private residential property."
But when they've raised an issue and it looks like it complies with previous Niantic statements, wouldn't it be preferable to highlight something as to HOW or WHY?
It wouldn't require an essay, either. Could somebody please just state that they cannot determine if there is a safe dock available, or whatever? Under existing rules sites that are only available to an exclusive group are still eligible if they meet acceptance criteria and don't hit any of the dis-qualifiers. So this one ticks the box that says 'Unsafe'.
Why?
Is every nomination meant to be a unicorn, where you just issue some verdict that cannot be discussed, challenged, or even reflected onto any other case?