Its stupid to try and assign copyright to things that aren't legal persons. At the end of the day, copyright holders have to make decisions about how to exercise their rights, which makes no sense for a tree. Instead people should just assign the copyright to some sort of trust or non-profit dedicated to the forest.
it's not just what to do with their rights, but the creative effort to create a work that deserves copyright. Trees don't make choices and engage in that type of creativity, nor does the forest floor or canopy.
From a philosophical point of view, I'd argue that trees and life have much more of the ability to make choices and even express creativity than inanimate objects like a rock or even a computer.
IIRC in some courts recently, it was decided that the output of LLMs cannot be copyrighted.
It will be interesting to see how this legal case goes.