Genealogy Chat

I have a large tree of nearly 300 names but can see it would be better if the distaff names could be given their own individual trees. What is the best way to achieve this without losing data etc?
john morrison

Welcome to the boards John

Unfortunately its not possible to do so on GR.

Is the tree on GR, your only one, or do you have a copy on your own computer? If not, it might be an idea of getting hold of a FH programme as most (all?) off-line tree programmes have a tree-splitting function.

You can down load a copy of your tree as a gedcom from GR to your computer, and use the programme to divide it as you wish. Your tree on this site will remain exactly as you left it.

As its not possible to have more than one tree on one account, you'd need to open seperate accounts to hold the split tree. I believe you can still use the same email address, but would have to have different passwords. You could mantain the additional trees on 'free' accounts, but use the paid for account to send messages, look for records etc.

My advice is - don't.

When I first started recording my tree on computer over ten years ago I tried to have separate trees for different branches but soon gave up as it became a nightmare to manage.

Since then I only have one definitive tree which has all my names on it. Programs such as FTM will quite happily manage trees containing several thousand names so the 300 or so you mention is actually small by comparison.

The free Familysearch from the Church of Latter Day Saints (Mormons) will cope with unlimited numbers and establish proper relationships e.g. cousins marrying with no problem, something which the GR tree has always struggled with.
It is very simple to use.
I have practically stopped adding to my GR tree - too much hassle!
You can also split off a particular line to produce a gedcom.
My one has just under 4,000 entries.