Exclusive Privilege: Redwood Pics ?? Opinions Please

[mdvaden]

Here's an interesting topic for discussion. I'm curious to see what people think about several angles of this scenerio.

 

This week, I got an email from Dr. Sillett, the redwood and canopy researcher, basically questioning that I show photos of known champion size redwoods, along with a name, enabling a viewer to understand what they are looking at.

 

Personally, I think what he expects or hopes for is unrealistic, and culturally abrasive. Let me repeat that last part - "Culturally Abrasive". Aspects of what he conveyed included:

 

... it is unwise to draw further attention to named trees (and groves) because this builds them up as celebrities ...

 

Note that further attention has nothing to do with maps or locations - just basic cropped images.

 

Basically, my response to Steve Sillett, was that he should spend several weeks reconsidering how he views this scenerio. Because Preston's Wild Trees book already made the tree celebrities. In fact, The Stratosphere Giant and several others already have celebrity status as trees.

 

Also, Robert Van Pelt has his Forest Giants of the Pacific Coast book with color photos of the largest trees of the species.

 

And one more thing I pointed out to Sillett, was that he is displaying the trees and information about them on his own web pages and albums:

 

http://www.humboldt.edu/~sillett/redwoods.html

 

Unless the album changes, the top left image with his parents is Lost Monarch. And although the name is not in the caption, most redwood enthusiasts can easily figure out which tree is must be.

 

The way I look at it, these largest and tallest trees have been written about in several publications, are discussed on hundreds of blogs, and are in photographs within books being sold in almost every visitor center in the redwoods national and state parks.

 

As long as maps and directions are not provided, it makes no sense to withhold cropped photos from the general public.

 

How would you interpret the motives and reasoning behind this request?

 

Seeing that many of you may know about the largest or tallest redwoods already, do you think that you should not be able to see photographs of the trees?

 

The reason I added "Exclusive Privilege" to the title, stems from the fact that Sillett maintains images online, as well as Preston on his website, and Van Pelt in book form - Sillett being the only one sending a message about the stoppage of named photos.

Edited November 28, 2008 by mdvaden

[Gaynor]

I don't understand the 'celebrity status' bit. I'm assuming it's because of the impact on their natural habitat if hundreds of tree 'fans' show up looking for them, yes?

These trees have been photographed since the dawn of the camera. Surely he's being... silly.

If I've misunderstood please tell me...

[Lee Winger]

You've been doing your own thing for years Mario, and doing it pretty well I might add, I personaly wouldn't be a bit concerened what Steve has to say...

 

Folks, Marios websites have been a great educational tool, as well as a very enjoyable read, well worth taking a look when you get the chance...

Edited November 28, 2008 by Lee Winger

[mdvaden]

I don't understand the 'celebrity status' bit. I'm assuming it's because of the impact on their natural habitat if hundreds of tree 'fans' show up looking for them, yes?

These trees have been photographed since the dawn of the camera. Surely he's being... silly.

If I've misunderstood please tell me...

 

You understand if you noted the "champion" part I wrote.

 

His request is not to withold redwood photos, but not show and name photos of trees like Stratosphere Giant, Lost Monarch, Del Norte Titan, etc.. The ones to which there are not maps - most of which were discovered by Taylor, Sillett, Atkins, Etc..

 

If Sillett didn't post albums with or without names, I wouldn't be scratching my head as much. I still would not agree with his request, but I wouldn't be going "hmmmm, I wonder what's up?".

Edited November 28, 2008 by mdvaden

[John Hancock]

I'm not bothered if I see a Redwood or not, whats all the fuss about

[Bundle 2]

I'm not bothered if I see a Redwood or not, whats all the fuss about

Although it has been over a decade that I visited in Humboldt County, it is an area of unique and memorable experiences..not least seeing the giant redwoods in their natural habitat.....truly awesome!

[mdvaden]

I'm not bothered if I see a Redwood or not, whats all the fuss about

 

The fuss (or concern) would be about me posting a photo like this one of Del Norte Titan, and telling you it's Del Norte Titan. Likewise if I did that with Lost Monarch, Stratosphere Giant or Iluvatar. Cropped images of the trees, telling their names.

 

My reply here would be the specific example about which Sillett emailed. I probably can't grasp his impression of my entire redwood album.

 

In many respects, it would be odd to post a photo like this and not tell the name. Because then several folks naturally post or email with a question "what tree is that?" Then what - say I can't tell you. That would seem a bit abrasive. So I figure as long as Sillett, Preston, Van Pelt, Gymnosperm Database and a bunch of others have etched the names of these trees in culture, why not let people see a simple photograph. I sure enjoy looking at them.

Edited November 28, 2008 by mdvaden

[scotspine1]

This week, I got an email from Dr. Sillett

 

YOU got an email from Sillet, no-one else did, it shows a lack of judgement on your part sharing the details of his private email. I guess your into 'freedom of speech' and all that BS? well.....with freedom of speech comes responsibility. That fact you've disclosed his email to the world just makes you look amateurish at best. Sillet comes out of it looking like the professional.

 

Having said that, I do agree with you on the Redwood naming/location issue.

[John Hancock]

Personally I think trees of note should be published with location details. Everyone should be able to enjoy them, not just the 'exclusive few'. Are the land/tree owners worried about compaction or just managing the 1000's of tree enthusiasts who are sure to descend if locations are given ??

 

On a personal note, I get far more 'turned-on' by seeing a majestic 400 year old Oak on a cold, misty morning...and I don’t have to cross the Atlantic to see one

[Lee Winger]

YOU got an email from Sillet, no-one else did, it shows a lack of judgement on your part sharing the details of his private email. I guess your into 'freedom of speech' and all that BS? well.....with freedom of speech comes responsibility. That fact you've disclosed his email to the world just makes you look amateurish at best. Sillet comes out of it looking like the professional.

 

Sorry mate but I don't agree with the above