Thread

New York City should carefully measure a new tree

79 points · 16 comments · willmeyers

Loading the complete thread in the background. This saved snapshot is available now. Refresh

paulkrush · 1790999646 · focus · HN ↗
Lidar is an awesome way to find tall trees!
prattmic · 1791065526 · focus · HN ↗
I wonder how accurate the locations are in this LiDAR dataset and/or the Queens Giant Wikipedia article. The Alley Pond Park candidate looks suspiciously close to the the Queens Giant, so I wonder if it's actually picking the same tree?
1. markstock · 1791072568 · focus · HN ↗
  The (typically government) agencies that pay for these scans create specifications for the data to meet. This is not hard to find. IIRC the accuracy is generally less than 0.1m (though the precision is usually 0.01 meters or feet).
rvba · 1791068839 · focus · HN ↗
[flagged]
1. phdelightful · 1791072116 · focus · HN ↗
  We should still have some public art projects even with the risk of them being vandalized.
  1. Razengan · 1791091075 · focus · HN ↗
    Heck the Pyramids were vandalized by the Romans...
2. saghm · 1791074520 · focus · HN ↗
  You genuinely think that we should never measure trees because it might increase the risk of people cutting them down?
  1. serf · 1791077130 · focus · HN ↗
    no, parent said that the list isn't a great idea, not the act of measurement.
    saghm · 1791077497 · focus · HN ↗
    Okay, so we should measure the trees, but not write down what we find out (or write it down and hide it from everyone)? That framing isn't any less bizarre to me
3. jrockway · 1791079250 · focus · HN ↗
  [delayed]
4. Razengan · 1791091038 · focus · HN ↗
  <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prometheus_(tree)" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prometheus_(tree)
  > The tree was at least 4,862 years old and possibly more than 5,000. It was cut down in 1964 by a graduate student and United States Forest Service personnel for research purposes. Those involved did not know of its world-record age before the cutting, and the circumstances and decision-making process remain controversial.
  I remember reading about another tree that was thousands of years old but it was cut/burned after its age was published/popularized..
  1. KylerAce · 1791092860 · focus · HN ↗
    The article at least shows it's very plausible that the people who cut it down didn't know that this particular tree was record breaking, only that the type of trees in that area were known to be extremely old
    interloxia · 1791101689 · focus · HN ↗
    <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiidk%27yaas" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiidk%27yaas
    Kiidk'yaas, also known as the Golden Spruce is an example.
    The article conveniently links to a list of individual trees.
    Razengan · 1791105768 · focus · HN ↗
    > Kiidk'yaas was felled in January 1997 by Grant Hadwin as an act of protest against the logging industry.
    What a fucking moron
    Ah but there's hope:
    > In 1977 a group of botanists from the University of British Columbia (UBC) visited Haida Gwaii to take cuttings of Kiidk'yaas.[5] These cuttings were grafted onto ordinary Sitka spruce, resulting in two golden saplings.
    The Tree of Gondor!
willmeyers · 1791081354 · focus · HN ↗
I didn't get to mention this in my post, but what I love most about being alive today is being able to walk outside and ask a question like "where's the tallest tree?" Then come up with some answer after a couple days of analysis. Questions that you thought were impossible to answer are now in a way answerable.
dmvjs · 1791129171 · focus · HN ↗
knowing how tall the tallest tree is instead of which is the tallest tree seems useful

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.