Heard about a person installing tree swings in San Francisco in an effort against the San Francisco Recreations & Parks Department, who keeps removing them after he installs them.

https://sfstandard.com/2025/05/10/mystery-man-at-war-with-san-francisco-tree-swings/

Some interesting quotes from the article:

“I will keep doing this until the sun swallows the Earth,” he vowed.

“It’s important that the swings have high uptime,” he said. “The moment I saw the second swing was cut down, I canceled all my meetings and rushed to Home Depot. The new swing was up within 16 hours.”

Apparently, he’s not the first to do this:

He isn’t the first to erect unauthorized play equipment in city trees. After a guerrilla collective installed 50 swings in 2018, parks officials swiftly cut them down, arguing that if someone were to get hurt, residents would ask why the city allowed a known hazard to persist.

And other organizations support him as well:

The San Francisco Forest Alliance, an environmental nonprofit critical of park prohibitions on tree swings, tree climbing, and going off-trail, laments the city’s stance. “The only tree swing SFRPD is okay with is on their logo,” the group quipped on its website in 2015.

The residents interviewed in the article seem to be generally in support and understanding of the risks of tree swinging:

One visitor to the swing Monday, Hannah MacLeod, found the rope, seat, and tree sturdy and said the swing brought back an early memory of building one with her dad. 

“I’ve come to this park once a week over the last year and a half, and today was my first time on the swing,” she said.

What did she think?

“Incredible. I don’t know why I haven’t done this before. I hope the guy continues to build them.”

But the department is removing the swings for safety reasons. In the article, they cite:

The department lists a history of injuries: Staff recall a French tourist who broke his leg on an unauthorized swing on Billy Goat Hill some years ago. In 2023, a woman died near Sacramento after falling from a rope swing. And in 2012, a San Diego high school student fell down a ravine after an unauthorized rope swing broke.

In the linked article in the previous quote, the family did in fact want the swings to be removed:

Following Hoedt’s death, her family called for action by California State Parks to prevent future tragedies like the one that befell them. The family suggested installing better signage regarding the law and possibly removing trees or limbs in areas where swings have been or could pose a danger.

Rope swings are illegal in the Folsom Lake State Recreation Area, but the law has not stopped swimmers from installing them over the years. Hoedt’s accident was the second in just a few weeks, and rope swings have long been a persistent issue.

And in the SF Standard article, they do in fact say:

Aparton acknowledges that the agency is playing a spoiler role. “We know it’s a bit of a bummer because rope swings can be charming, but we can’t assure the safety of people or the trees,” she said. 

When asked whether it is possible for someone to work with the city to install a tree swing in an authorized manner, Aparton said no. “Having a chain wrapped around a tree limb (or rubbing against the trunk) while suspending the weight of adults over a hillside isn’t super safe,” she said.

Which makes sense to me, because evaluating the structural integrity of tree branches seems like an unsolvable problem, though I don’t know if this is actually true or not.

Taking some time to consider the two articles I’ve read, I find myself thinking that SFRPD is in the right. It’s one of those situations where I think humans are really bad at assessing potentially fatal risks, and it’s good that the government has this stance and intervenes. For example, there are a lot of freedoms we give up in the name of safety like requiring people to wear seat belts in cars, wear helmets on motorcycles, and get vaccinations.

However, it does seem like perhaps this particular problem could be solved if swings were just installed in more places. In fact, the article cites one specific location:

The Swing Guy, as he is known in the neighborhood, would agree. A startup executive who asked that his name be withheld over fears of legal action, he is dedicated to fighting for the right to swing on one of the city’s most panoramic perches.

Maybe this could be resolved by installing swings at the locations people want to install tree swings. The SFRPD does say that there are a lot of swings that are already installed:

Tamara Aparton, spokesperson for the Parks Department, said in a statement that there are 184 playgrounds in the city “with swings we can vouch for.”

But I don’t think a swing in a playground is the same, so I don’t find it commensurate.