New York City should carefully measure a new tree

(blog.willmeye.rs)

45 points by willmeyers23 hours ago

3 comments

prattmic3 hours ago
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?
- markstock1 hour ago
  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).
paulkrush22 hours ago
Lidar is an awesome way to find tall trees!
rvba3 hours ago
such lists just provide a list of targets for some assholes who will cut the trees
- jrockway8 minutes ago
  Maybe. There is a "great tree" list and all of them are still standing: <a href="https://www.nycgovparks.org/facilities/great-trees" rel="nofollow">https://www.nycgovparks.org/facilities/great-trees</a><p>One of these is on my usual walking route and I had no idea. After reading this, I looked at it carefully and was wowed. These things can hide in plain sight, but I appreciated having my attention drawn to it. It's great!
- saghm1 hour ago
  You genuinely think that we should never measure trees because it might increase the risk of people cutting them down?
  - serf43 minutes ago
    >You genuinely think that we should never measure trees because it might increase the risk of people cutting them down?<p>no, parent said that the list isn't a great idea, not the act of measurement.
    - saghm37 minutes ago
      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
- phdelightful2 hours ago
  We should still have some public monuments even with the risk of them being vandalized.