I am not a fan of these super-natural art projects. It is one thing to make a statue that might stand for a thousand years ... or not. It is another to designate forest land and other resources, to attempt to lock them away from use by future generations.

The legal system dealt with this hundreds of years ago. We cannot have "dead hands" dictating how future generations should live and work. The proper vehicle for such things is government. Donate the land as a park or nature preserve and cross your fingers that your intent will be respected.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_against_perpetuities

Lock it in a massive ice block that takes 88 years to melt. https://elephant.art/laurie-anderson-duets-on-ice-performanc...

"Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

We typically use the word "art", which, yes, is often performative and sometimes nonsense!

Not all art is to everyone's taste, and that's ok too. You don't have to enjoy this art piece. I find the idea of creating something that I cannot possibly enjoy to be quite poignant. But hey, I'm sure you have art you enjoy that I do not.

We are so starved for aura we have to farm into the future now, I too would like to dine.

Those trees will mature in 2050ish timeframe. If this person put together a trust to manage the particulars, they might be alive to ensure the trees get harvested and processed into paper.

Trees get turned into paper every day, I'm sure there's a paper mill willing to take the work, especially in Northern Europe.

I like to imagine futures where they judge us through their standards as harshly as we judge the past through our standards.

So, instead of some future people celebrating this project, they just think "Ew, what kind of monster would wish harm on a beautiful old tree?"

Or they look on it with nostalgia because by then most people use emoji as written communication and have never learned to read.