No it isn't inherently valuable, especially when it is irrelevant. Just knowing facts doesn't give value to anything unless those facts are somehow relevant to one's life. And even then the value of knowing those facts still depends on if you actually use them or not. I can learn accounting, the geography of Madagascar, or the chemical composition of the planet Neptune. But none of that knowledge is of value to me because it is irrelevant to my life. There is no inherent value is knowing facts.
This is getting weird. Facts are "knowledge from experience", they are essential in the process of "applied skills" (applied science).
If you love trees, as I do, when you know how each species of tree managed to survive for millions of years, does that itself not enhance YOUR experience of YOUR interaction with that tree, at both intellectual and emotional level? I lived with trees, I built a log cabin where we lived for 5 years, ran 100 chickens, had 2 ponies, 2 goats, 2 shepherds.
5 of the best years of my life.
There are isolated tribes who encourage tree hugging as a fertility rite. All forest dwellers are knowledgeable about their forest, don't complain to city-folk that your knowledge of trees is wasted in a concrete city environment. You like Trees? Go live with them, I am sure they will shelter and protect you and, in the end, even use your molecules to grow another 1/2". An excellent symbiotic relationship.
I often cite the honey bee as an example of a succesful symbiotic relationship. The bee has become the sexual messenger and pollinator of flowering plants. Sweet honey and living among magical colors are the bee's reward.
IMO, all these philosophical discussions are about "All knowledge is vain, save when there is work" (Gibran)