This famous tree has been chopped down for no good reason. Maybe an inatter can mark it off as dead now 
https://uk.inaturalist.org/observations/169666604
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-66952980
It also highlights to me just how far off some observations are from the actual location. Thereās one tree there and itās clearly visible on the satellite map but quite a few observations are way off the mark.
Theyāve asked people to stay away from the site. Probably still collecting evidence.
Oh, so it was just illeagally chopped down, not bc it had a disease or anything? How weird, I wonder what would make someone justā¦ cut down a tree that isnāt theirās.
iNat only allows animals to be annotated as dead or alive.
Donāt nobody care about plants.
But this tree WAS alive when it was observed then.
Annotations refer to the organismās state at the time of the observation.
If youāre referring to iNaturalistās decisions regarding plant annotations, thatās an unfounded statement. The reason there isnāt an Alive or Dead annotation for plants is because we felt that itās often too difficult/confusing in the many situations where perennials look ādeadā and it was deemed that the likely costs would outweigh the benefits.
I have only rarely wanted to use it - for a brown herbarium sheet specimen - which is when I noticed that option isnāt there.
The benefit would be negligible, whatever the cost, I agree.
To be fair there is every chance that the tree will sprout back from the root stock. Calling it dead is probably incorrect for now.
This tragedy prompts me to recite my long-held (hoped-for?) forestry rule: No one should be allowed to cut down any tree that is older than they are. The benefits for the protection of old trees and old growth forests is self-evident. One curious side-effect of my forestry rule is that it might give rise to a whole new career pathway for septuagenarians, octogenarians, etc., etc., to be hired by hungry timber companies.
I saw this a few hours ago and thought about bringing it up on here, but decided against it. I figured someone would post about it. Just seeing the picture at a glance, I knew right away that was Hadrianās Wall too, so doubly wrong. Very, very senseless and tragic.
Iāve just read about this here, a truly shocking example of senseless vandalism. I hate to think of it, but could it have been some sort of dare for social media? A terrifying thought.
I admit to feeling a slight tingle of unease that all the comments Iāve read in the press focus on the treeās role as a landmark and an attraction for tourists and photographers. Understandable, but very anthropocentric. What Iād love to hear is some input about its ecological roleā¦ how many other species were associated in some way with this tree and without it will suffer, die or, in the case of more āmobileā species, move elsewhere. An old tree is so much more than just a tree.
I visited the observation. noted the red ! Introduced in Northumberland, Englandā¦It isnāt a native tree in the current scheme. Humans have mapped out the exact geographic map which the species should be in. Kids are known for doing strange things. I probably did my fair share of strange things in my youth. Although it is not a native species, it is an exceptional tree, a Celebrity Tree. They are investigating so we wonāt know. and when they found out, it has become old news. Just a minor happenings somewhere in England. Didnāt Washington chopped down his fatherās tree ?
I wonder, about a 16 year old boy - bringing down a tree that size. Many many questions. He was surely not alone?
https://uk.inaturalist.org/observations/22837202
in the notes there
It once stood alongside others but they have been removed over time for unknown reasons, possibly to improve sightlines or for gamekeeping purposes As per Wikipedia
Hopefully someone will go up there and count the rings to get the exact age of the tree. Whether it was native or not means very little to me. Many of our upland areas in the UK have been denuded of trees due to centuries of industry, farming and generally poor ecological management. I hope this event can energise the debate about planting larger areas of tree cover in these areas to give more resilience to wildlife. I imagine the timber from this tree will be very valuable too so I hope someone is on guard to prevent the hoards of souvenir hunters from trying to get a slice of history.
Holy Zarquanās singing fish! First the Glastonbury Thorn (and its successors), now this. 
Didnāt realise it is far enough North to see the Aurora Borealis
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/gallery/2023/sep/28/hadrians-wall-sycamore-gap-tree-in-pictures
Just saw this
I can appreciate the sentiment, but it drives me crazy when people think theyāre helping public spaces after a disturbance by taking matters into their own hands, a lot of the time making things worse. I donāt necessarily think thatās the case in this case with one sapling being planted that can be removed (though āfrom the garden centerā gives me pause) .
But after a rather epic fire in my neck of the woods (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eagle_Creek_Fire) we started to hear of a lot of folks who wanted to help by spreading seeds. I can only speculate that there were folks who got some āwildflowerā seed mix off the shelf at the garden center that likey contained aggressive nonnative species, rather than a locally appropriate native seed mix. We have enough weeds to deal with already.
I think itās great that people want to help, just reach out to those who actually steward the public space and know (as best as we can know at any given point in time) the appropriate course of action.
I applaud the National Trust for removing this sapling (even if it was devastating to the planter), but also for trying to propagate a replacement (I assume) from the fruit and by cuttings from this magnificent victim/tree.
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.