Japanese Agricultural Land

Hi, I’m not sure I understood your answer as translation seems to be getting in the way, but I would like to make it clear that I most certainly didn’t express any opinions about the eligibility of this object or any other, and I would like to remind of the respect-related rule of the forum, just in case.

Also, this discussion is starting to go in circles. This is not an appeal post and a different argument is presented in each comment. If there is nothing further you are trying to achieve with these posts than to demonstrate this specific wayspot should be removed, this is better done through the dedicated forms I pointed you to above, or through in-game report systems. Thank you for your understanding.

The screenshot is a reply email from the administrative representative who received the inquiry. The contact person’s first and last name and the email address assigned to the business were indicated. The reply address was supposed to be an individual, but it was crudely altered to Niantic. Since this was a response to a general question and had no legal effect, it was not a basis for Niantic to remove Wayspot.

I have no objection to raising the issue that agricultural lands, unlike private residences, are not included in the criteria for removal, or that Wayspot, which does not meet the eligibility criteria, has not yet been addressed as a target for removal. However, one problem is that, unlike residential land, it is difficult to determine whether agricultural land is used by an individual or a group of people based on its appearance alone. It is a determination, not a judgment. Perhaps we need to prove that we are the individual’s farmland as a basis for seeking removal. Or although personal residence is included in the Wayfarer team’s deletion criteria,
but not personal farmland. Either way, we should not publish without permission an email response to which we have not received consent to publish, and Niantic will not take action based on that content.

1 Like

こんにちは、この議論には言語の壁もあって、少し証拠が少ない様に見えるので、ウェブサイトにある証拠等(日本語)を提出したいと思います。
生産緑地とは、「市街化区域内の農地で、良好な生活環境の確保に効用があり、公共施設等の敷地として適している500平方メートル以上の農地を都市計画に定め、建築行為等を許可制により規制し、都市農地の計画的な保全を図る制度です。」
超簡単に言ってしまうと、このスレッドに出てくる「生産緑地」の標識は、日本政府が一定の条件のもと「法令により保護する都市部の農地」であることを第三者に明示するための物です。
次に、日本政府(国土交通省)による「生産緑地」についての説明のページです。これらは日本語ですが、この対象物の理解に役に立つ可能性があります。

国土交通省「生産緑地制度」

国土交通省「生産緑地制度の概要」(PDF)

根拠となる日本法条文
e-Gov 法令検索リンク: 生産緑地法(昭和四十九年法律第六十八号)

「e-Govポータル」( https://www.e-gov.go.jp/ )は、日本の行政機関が発信する政策・施策に関する情報、行政サービス、各種オンラインサービスなどに関する情報を対象に、情報ナビゲーションに資することを目的として日本政府「デジタル庁」が整備、運営するWebサイト。 一部機能限定ながら、一応英語ページもある( | e-Gov Portal )。

3 Likes

I believe that OP is reporting on a kind of social-engineering exploit that is occurring in their country. Depending upon how someone interprets ‘green space’ or ‘landscape’ or green production land, they may accept markers for farm fields as though they were park land features. This issue may be exacerbated when different languages are used in the nominations, or if appeals or removal requests are handled by people from different cultures.

For reasons that are unknown to us, Niantic has coupled together the concepts of Private Residential Property and Farmland in their rejection criteria, but seems to ignore Farmland when considering removal criteria.

Another aspect of this problem could be a dichotomy between lawful players and scoff-laws. If a player can quickly grab a couple of snapshots they can make a nomination that slips through review and gets accepted.

Lawful players recognize that the wayspot is on farmland, and are reluctant to approach and collect evidence since it requires trespassing.

1 Like

The email you received states that many of the green space areas are privately owned. In other words, some green space areas are not privately owned. If this email is valid, it means that removing Wayspot because it is a green space area is a wrong decision. If you want to remove this Wayspot, you should contact the municipality where the piles were installed.

If you can get the documents from the administration that can show that it meets the removal criteria, you can inquire, and right now we don’t know why the Wayspot is not removed, so we don’t know what kind of documents you need to have in place. And if you are recommending that the administration request removal, I don’t think that is appropriate. There is no need to involve any more people who are not involved with Niantic Games or Wayfarer.
The Wayfarer team did not disclose the details of the removal criteria, and I don’t understand why this Wayspot has not been removed, but I don’t see how this Wayspot would interfere with the use of the farmland as it can be accessed from the road without stepping into the cultivated portion of the property. The Wayfarer team has announced that it will begin addressing the issue of Wayspot that not meeting eligibility criteria not being removed in the 2023 AMA, yet there should still be very few removals for that reason. It is necessary to discuss the issue of Wayspot not meeting the eligibility criteria, but since we do not know why it has not been removed, pursuing the Wayspot in the production green space any further will only become tiring.