Britain's Latest True Crime Thriller: Who Killed the Sycamore Tree?
wsj.comFor those not aware, this is major news here in the UK. The trial is being live-streamed (with reporting, cameras are not allowed) in most major outlets.
Here's a BBC article summarising events in the trial last week: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g3kxx1k6xo
I'm glad I walked Hadrian's Wall Path before this happened.
Close to the midpoint you're walking up and down a bunch of small but steep hills and valleys, when a huge tree appears in the next valley.
It was really a memorable view in the mostly monotonous English countryside.
I'm disappointed by the amount of cynicism on display here. Yes, it was "just" a tree, and we have others. It also seems that the stump is still alive, so in some sense it wasnt "killed".
But it was also a thing of beauty that was deliberately mutilated for no reason. I think many people worry that this kind of casual destruction is becoming increasingly commonplace, and that valuing natural beauty is becoming harder to even comprehend in the coarsend popular culture of this little island.
Edit to add:
Over the last few years in the UK a great many ancient trees have been cut down to build HS2, as well as various roads. To the developers they were just an inconvenience: in the way, and not offering any opportunity for value extraction except as dead timber. They were probably also not as instagrammable as the tree in question.
Mostly the media coverage of this focussed on the human conflict, not the trees themselves. I wonder whether we're losing our ability to even talk about the dignity and intrinsic value of non-human things.
On the other hand HS2 will end up providing a net increase in woodland.
Are you sure you mean ancient and not veteran? Ancient trees usually have some rather special protections.
At least it seems to be regrowing: https://www.npr.org/2024/08/01/nx-s1-5060047/sycamore-gap-tr...
Some men just want to watch the world burn.
What kind of tree is this? I know a lot of trees get called sycamores
Just a reminder, if you ever look at England on a map and try and guess where the middle of it is, that is where the tree stood, alone, surrounded by fields.
Until it got chopped down.
I had actually planned to walk to this tree simply because of how it looked, its location and how peculiar and lovely it seems, from a late night browse on google maps.
> Just a reminder, if you ever look at England on a map and try and guess where the middle of it is, that is where the tree stood, alone, surrounded by fields.
The tree was located about 30 miles from the northern border of England. It could possibly be described as on the middle by longitude but it's far from the middle of England as a whole.
I mean Great Britain
No need to downvote me stickler!
I don’t normally say anything but thanks when corrected but in this case most foreigners would expect England to represent the GB landmass so in this case there’s no need to point out the error. Even if it was , it’s odd to start explaining the borders, it’s almost as if you are entirely confused by the prospect of the tree being in the center of the GB landmass. I’m sure you are not but that’s what it comes across as. Only saying this so you work on your context analysis in discussions.
Sorry you were downvoted - not me guv!
I would say it is worth pointing out though, specifically because foreigners are most likely to be confused between England and GB. Hope you get your karma back :)
hahahaha ah no worries mate have a good day my main man
What a couple of morons.
I cant believe they've gone Not Guilty.
The state will sacrifice them to their gods.
An example will be made and these men will be severely punished on a much harder scale that what is deserved.
Its only a tree after all. It wasn't even documented until that silly Robin Hood movie.
> Its only a tree after all
It was bringing a lot more joy and happiness to the world for a lot more people than these idiots. But yeah, extreme punishment isn't bringing it back, and all the folks knowing it was them wot done it is surely punishment in itself. A fine and community service would be plenty.
It’s not about the tree, nor the joy and happiness it brought to many (as very few people knew of this tree, compared to how many are upset). I think what people really don’t like is the deliberate attempt to upset other people (even if it’s not them) for fun.
maybe if they didn't try to protect specific (or arbitrary) trees by law then idiots (most people) wouldn't try to demonstrate how stupid the law was by cutting the tree down. oh, and you're right, i'm not trying to hide the fact that i'm with the people not the trees - in general and in this specific case.
Why is it stupid for specific trees to be protected?
for similar reason why specific people, animals or chairs don't deserve more protection than others.
Or buildings? Or mammals? Or Chordata?
I don't think this is a well thought out argument.
cutting an annoying random tree down in your annoying random neighbor's yard is just as bad as this event. this is the foundation of western civilization. prioritizing one tree over another leads to bad stuff. many have thought this through and many have argued the opposite (as you) and have sought opportunity in dismantling this principle. it's not a new debate, despite what this HN clickbait makes it seem to be.
Is defacing the Mona Lisa the same as defacing a train car, in your view?
If there is any difference, would it be related to the value of the object? Would you say a random tree in a backyard has the same "value" as an iconic tree whose destruction is causing widespread outrage?
I'm not sure what your argument is, but as far as I'm aware this tree didn't have specific, out of the ordinary, protection. I believe it may have even been on private land so the offense is exactly the same as cutting down a neighbors tree. It also happened to damage a protected heritage site, but those are hardly unique in the UK...
it had no specific protection. it was just a tree in law. but they have a silly way of 'working out' how much it was valued and that is apparently almost a quarter of a million pounds!
Presidents, royalty, maybe celebrities, there are plenty of people that deserve extra protection, there are plenty of examples of animal species with small populations that deserve specific protections, and there are chairs that have more protection than others too, the Vitsœ 620 Chair is an example, and a court recognised the chair's design as a "personal, original creation of highly aesthetic value".
People don’t have ecosystems. Trees do. And they change through age. And many species insects depend on old trees.
The punishment, if they are found guilty, will likely be partly intended to act as a deterrent in addition to being punitive and compensative. I.e., a judge could find that setting an example is in the best interest of society, to deter other knuckleheads from vandalising monumental items.
They should both be made take a chainsaw to their shins and denied medical attention.
Nobody killed the sycamore tree - they coppiced it, and it’s regrowing with vigour.
It is absolutely not “regrowing with vigour”. When I visited six weeks ago, there was one very small sprout a few inches in size.
For comparison, we had to fell a mature sycamore on our land last year; this now has more than a dozen shoots growing from its base, ranging between six and ten feet tall, all with lots of leaves on them.
All of the stories celebrating the regrowth are from August 2024. They describe 12 “sprouts” - with a hope that they might grow into something more. As of March 2025 - they hadn’t.
You claimed the tree was “regrowing with vigour” - this is simply false at this point in time.
Are you sure? The video I just saw on the BBC shows the tree being felled at its base! That's not pruning.
No, that’s coppicing. I didn’t say it was pruned. Coppicing does not kill the tree - it actually does the opposite, and extends the lifespan.
And sycamore trees are an invasive non-native species. In ancient forest, teams of people are employed to remove them
This particular tree was at least 1000 years old - there's documentary evidence of Robin Hood using it for shade.
It was 150 years old, it makes no difference to me personally in terms of feelings, but 1000 was far enough out that I wanted to correct it. The documentary evidence was a Kevin Costner movie.
I suspect that the user you're replying to was joking
It was planted in the 1800s