RIP the Broccoli Tree

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=that+wanaka+tree&tbm=isch

> Kiidk'yaas (meaning "ancient tree" in the Haida language[1]), also known as the Golden Spruce, was a Sitka Spruce tree (Picea sitchensis 'Aurea') that grew on the banks of the Yakoun River on the Haida Gwaii archipelago, in British Columbia Canada. It had a rare genetic mutation that caused its needles to be golden in colour (rather than the usual green). Kiidk'yaas was considered sacred by the Haida people

> Kiidk'yaas was felled in January 1997 by Grant Hadwin as an act of protest against the logging industry.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/18/goblin-valley-boy-...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methuselah_(tree)

Amazing.

I finally find out why the "copse of trees" at Gettysburg is called that. Thank you.

Also, the tree could probably have been saved. It didn't look like a cut that would have destroyed the entire tree. A good arborist could have removed that without overly damaging the rest of the tree.

The stumps are all left at unusual angles. Those aren't the result of typical notching and felling techniques. Those were cut intentionally. My guess is they were notched above that and then cut down to that height.

It may be intentional coppicing?

I'm only slightly exaggerating.

In defiance of my above statement, I own this tree and it is my favorite tree. The forestry service cored it and it's at least 220 years old.

https://imgur.com/a/c2AVd

I maintain an active mountain images account, but when I post from somewhere untouched, I'm deliberately vague as to the location.

I'm watching the same thing happen with a tarn on Mt. Rainier. People are figuring out its location, and soon it will be highly trafficked. Most of these places look untouched precisely because people have gone to some trouble not to touch them.

Some overuse is a worthy trade, if, when at the ballot box and the cash register, nature-aware humans make the deliberate choice to sacrifice in order to preserve that which remains.

It's tough because I'm a big fan of getting people outside, and this renewed interest in visiting national parks could in theory drive more funding and interest in wildlands preservation, but in the meantime has drawn hordes of people who don't always respect the place they're visiting.

There are microcosms of the instagram top spots phenomenon you've listed all over the place as well. This past summer I went to visit a backcountry waterfall in my hometown where locals used to cool off, and could not believe how many people there were there, some clearly from far away, taking pictures of themselves in front of it. The instagram location tag for it has thousands of posts, for a place that is pretty but not really spectacular.

Here's a story about a similar location that blew up on the internet and suffered for it: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/20/nyregion/blue-hole-swimmi...

Look at Yellowstone, or the country of Guatemala, where it's the interest by visitors that provides the necessary incentives to protect the natural beauty.

The same has (somewhat) worked to reduce the risk of extinction for many species of African mammals as well.

someone is sitting at home, feeling worthless, like their life is pointless and they could disappear without anyone noticing.

but there's this tree everyone likes. people notice this tree. because you see lots of pictures of it, people must visit it often. it's a confluence.

if you were to, say, scratch your name into the bark, people would notice. you would have made some difference on the world, for better or worse.

if you were to cut a branch down, people would DEFINITELY notice. people would think about you, when no one would before. even if the thoughts aren't positive.

in other words, to not feel so small and meaningless.

One day people saw his brother peeing in the holy Well of Zamzam. This is the most sacred water in Islam. They asked him why he was doing such a thing. “My brother is famous and will be remembered forever in the history,” he said. “I can never be as wise or as generous as him, so this is how I make sure I will be remembered forever.”

As for why, who knows, but my guess is we're looking at a physical world manifestation of the same personality that drives many (non-professional) internet trolls. Sadistic and attention seeking.

Well limbs don't just crack vertically when they're cut horizontally. Either someone hacked at it vertically (no real reason), or that black spot is the mark of black canker, a willow disease. The only fix is to cut off the diseased limb in the dormant season. And it's almost the dormant season.

Why did all the limbs get cut off? Dunno, maybe it had to do with canker too. But remember, plants are not here for humans' amusement - they often require trimming, chopping, replanting, large culls to prevent disease spread, and all kinds of other treatment to care for them. The end result may be an ugly tree, but a tree that lives.

I could be wrong. But it's best not to dwell on the worst of things if you don't know what really happened.

I think that's a questionable apportionment of blame.

http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Party_Tree

There's the role of fame itself, which is related to, but not the same so far as I see, as power. Both are ordinal -- it's a lot better to be the most famous vs, say, the 10th most famous, in ways that having only, say, $90 rather than $100 isn't. But there's something you're giving up for fame -- particularly privacy and autonomy. There's a risk to it (and there are numerous artists, politicians, and businesspeople who've been attacked, kidnapped, or murdered).

In biological evolution, there was a stage at which the first carnivorous organisms appeared. Before that, it was pretty much OK to let it all hang out, and just sort of slime around on the seafloor, munching on plants. Afterward, defences (and some offences) like shells and pincers and teeth emerged. You needed to protect yourself.

And while such defenses still exist, most animals now don't have heavy body armor. It's too heavy, and too cumbersome. There's hide and fur, tails to swat away annoying things. But also social habits -- the grooming behaviours of primates and other animals in particular. "I'll pick parasites off your back if you'll pick them off of mine." Standards and norms of behaviour.

The problem of too much fame, especially for lifeforms which aren't aware of the problem or cannot defend themselves (or move or hide, as with trees, hell, even rock formations), is one that's been around for a while. It definitely pre-dates the Internet as mulitiple posts here note. I've run across items about geotagged images of rhinoceroses, or of rare plants, or other treasures.

There's this item from a few days ago:

http://e360.yale.edu/features/unnatural-surveillance-how-onl...

As for how to deal with the problem socially, I think that may be the role of taboo. That's taking the matter beyond economics to an extent, as taboo puts an infinite cost or price to doing a thing.

Why wouldn't we care about the acts carried out offline being influenced by our activities online?

My 2 cents, I believe it belongs here because the question of whether social media is a net benefit to society is frequently debated here, and this article uses the tree as an example to argue that it is a net negative. There's some interesting discussion in this thread about attention-seeking vandalism in the context of the internet.