A Tree With No Name
Honoring those memorialized in family trees everywhere...and the ones yet to be discovered. Sharing inspiration, information & opinions for the journey finding family.
19 August 2026
Summer on the Farm: Remembering How Our Ancestors Lived
11 August 2026
Our Memories Are Family History, Too
I was watching S3Ep13, titled "Animal Anarchy" and was reminded so much of my younger years. Virtually everything they touched on in the episode brought back truly fond memories. Memories I don't think I've even shared with my male offspring. Here are some of the highlights...
First, they delved into how, years ago, you could buy baby alligators in Florida, to take home as a pet. While they actually stopped selling them around 1967 (the year before I was born), I vividly remember asking my dad, while on a trip to visit family in Florida when I was in elementary school, if I could have a baby alligator...he said no. I was too young to understand it was no longer legal, or to comprehend baby alligators turn into great big dangerous alligators. Besides, Baltimore hardly boasts the proper climate to raise a happy gator.
During the 1960's and 70's, baby monkeys were all the rage. There was even a time you could mail-order baby squirrel monkeys (who knew?!) As a teenager in the 80's, I recall being insistent I wanted a capuchin monkey. They're easier to train and have better dexterity and problem-solving skills. I was convinced it would make a great little sidekick. My mother promptly squashed every dream I had of getting one. I remember her telling me I'd be changing little diapers forever, since they can live 40+ years with proper care. Not to mention, capuchins like to throw poop! Being a know-it-all teenager, it never once occurred to me to actually research the drawbacks. I just knew they looked cute. In hindsight, I'm awfully glad she told me—in no uncertain terms—"absolutely not!"
In the show, they also highlighted a new experience of the mid-1970's—the African wildlife preserve—where you drove your own car through the park. In 1974, Kings Dominion (just north of Richmond, Virginia) opened their 100-acre Lion Country Safari. I was 6 years old at the time. I had been on a camping trip with my father and older brother. On the way home, I was napping in the back of our pastel blue VW bug. All of a sudden, my father exclaimed "Wake up! What is that??" When I sat up, I was completely amazed to see lions and giraffes wandering around. I'm told I said with amazement "Where are we??!!" The park included lions, tigers, rhinos, hippos, giraffes, zebras, antelopes, and many types of exotic birds. By 1975, just a year later, the ability to drive your own car was replaced with a much safer (and air-conditioned) monorail. Although it probably wasn't the most prudent way to see the wild (sometimes predatory) animals, it was positively amazing and something most people will never have the chance to experience. I'm so glad my dad saw the signs for the park and decided to give it a go. I only wish we'd had a camera with us. While I remember the "experience" (I actually do have a memory of waking up and being both confused and amazed...along with a vague feeling of the vast expanse of the "savannah"), I don't have any real memories of the actual animals.
My father used to delight in sharing his memories and stories. He was a wonderful storyteller and I wish I'd recorded him, because no one can share the stories quite the way he did. His eyes always sparkled and he'd grin like a guilty little schoolboy when he'd say "Did I ever tell you about the time...." His stories were always recalled in such vivid detail and with obvious fondness. I rarely document my own memories (I guess I figure they won't be all that interesting to anyone else). Hazardous History prompted me to share these few small little bits with you. Because, if I can be fascinated by a letter about how well the crops in the early 1900's were or weren't doing, perhaps someone will enjoy hearing about my safari adventure (and may even recall similar adventures of their own).
At its core, genealogy is about history—our history. It's the story of our families, their triumphs and tragedies—and everything in between. For most leaves on our tree, we only have a tiny snapshot of their lives, comprised of various (mostly) factual records and (if we're lucky) some photographs. We're often left to imagine how the blanks get filled in. In some cases, we probably just leave the blanks and never think about them. It's wonderful to see genealogists share both family stories and their own experiences, capturing them for future generations.
Image by Gregor Mima from Pixabay04 August 2026
Under Certain Conditions, Quick Edit Can Quietly Delete a Death Fact
I went back and marked him as deceased in a "Quick Edit", and the profile then showed correctly. To test if it's a wacky new change, I went back and marked him as living and it totally erased the death fact with no prompt it was going to happen. I'm not sure if this behavior existed before the recent changes. I don't believe I've ever run into this specific scenario before, and I can't say I recall ever testing this previously. Normally, if there's a death fact, it's reflected in the profile header. I typically wouldn't have a reason to flip a confirmed deceased person back to living—at least not intentionally. Living should only display if there's no death fact.
With any other fact, if you choose Edit and Delete, you'll be prompted with a pop-up asking you to confirm you're sure you want to take the action.
This prompt does not appear when you change a person from deceased to living using Quick Edit. The fact is simply unceremoniously erased. While this makes complete logical sense—a living person should not have a death fact—it doesn't account for the possibility of human error. I'd much rather see a prompt so users aren't caught unaware. Perhaps a pop-up saying "A death fact exists for this person. Changing them to living will delete this fact. Are you sure you want to make this change?" I went back to the person's profile and added the death date and location back in again, and the profile did again update correctly.
To see if this behavior was consistent, I went into a living person's profile and marked them deceased.** I was pleased to see the profile did update properly. I went ahead and added a death fact, and it also saved properly. Then I did a Quick Edit, and marked the person living again, and it again totally deleted the death fact without any prompt. In this test, the deletion was appropriate and it confirmed this appears to be consistent behavior.
**It's more common to see others marking someone deceased temporarily to try and cajole the algorithms into a few new hints. I'd like to point out, this is not recommended since it potentially makes details of a living person visible to others if you don't have a private and unsearchable tree. While it's not best practice, if you choose to do this, please be sure you set the person back to living to protect their privacy.
The original issue, the improperly displayed header, was more than likely a hiccup. But if you accidentally mark a deceased person living, it certainly appears your death fact will be quietly deleted. It may seem like a small issue, but if you've attached multiple sources or records to the death fact, restoring everything could become a bit of a chore. And let's face it—oopsies can and do happen. It's not outside the realm of possibility someone (especially new users or those who are technologically challenged) might accidentally make a mistake.
While unlikely to cause any widespread issues, it does highlight there are still some hiccups happening with all the recent changes. It's good to be vigilant. Sometimes we notice things we never noticed before. And sometimes, especially in the absence of a user facing change log, we find unexpected changes in logic. As I said, I can't say this didn't happen before—but it's certainly the first time I've noticed it happen.
Image by Thomas from Pixabay

