I looked into this a year or two ago when the report came out amid a huge PR campaign. The ancient tree is of clonal origin, probably from layered branches held against moist ground by snowpack, serially from generation to generation. I forget its age, but it is nothing unusual. There is root material however that carbon-dated out to the reported figure.
It's a matter of definition of what constitutes a tree, as I pointed out in "The Bristlecone Book". If a tree is defined as being a trunk with its own root system standing where the seed germinated, then the oldest bristlecone is still the oldest tree. This spruce would have to compete with other clones, one of which has worked out to over 40,000 yrs. Get my 2007 book for more. It's cheap.

I will. Thanks.