Get Premium
Dark mode theme is available exclusively for premium users. Learn more about the benefits of subscribing.
No fees, cancel anytime.
Dark Mode 
No fees, cancel anytime 
User submission
776K
7.6M
Mayor Cuts Down Man’s 30-Year-Old Tree, He Revenges Him In The Best Possible Way (UPDATE)
Giedrė Vaičiulaitytė Community member
555
ADVERTISEMENT
What would you do if the council ordered the death of one of your favorite trees, and then made you pay for it?
That’s what happened to one man in Redondo Beach, California, but although he lost the battle, he most certainly won the war. Because unknown to the council, the man, who’s an arborist, had a perfect way to avenge the death of his 30-year-old pepper tree. What did he do? Scroll down to find out. His story was recently shared online, and it’s since been read over 150k times.
UPDATE: Since posting this article, the author of the original post has apparently revealed that they made the whole thing up. We apologize for any inconvenience.
ADVERTISEMENT
Credits: GoblinsStoleMyHouse
RELATED:
If anyone is wondering how a giant sequoia looks like, here’s a pic:
ADVERTISEMENT
Image credits: Amelia Takacs
Games
Anyone can write on Bored Panda. Start writing!
Follow Bored Panda on Google News!
Follow us on Flipboard.com/@boredpanda!
7.6Mviews
Share on Facebook
Read more »
As a writer and image editor for Bored Panda, Giedrė crafts posts on many different topics to push them to their potential. She's also glad that her Bachelor’s degree in English Philology didn’t go to waste (although collecting dust in the attic could also be considered an achievement of aesthetic value!) Giedrė is an avid fan of cats, photography, and mysteries, and a keen observer of the Internet culture which is what she is most excited to write about. Since she's embarked on her journalistic endeavor, Giedrė has over 600 articles under her belt and hopes for twice as much (fingers crossed - half of them are about cats).
Read less » Giedrė Vaičiulaitytė
Author, Community member
As a writer and image editor for Bored Panda, Giedrė crafts posts on many different topics to push them to their potential. She's also glad that her Bachelor’s degree in English Philology didn’t go to waste (although collecting dust in the attic could also be considered an achievement of aesthetic value!) Giedrė is an avid fan of cats, photography, and mysteries, and a keen observer of the Internet culture which is what she is most excited to write about. Since she's embarked on her journalistic endeavor, Giedrė has over 600 articles under her belt and hopes for twice as much (fingers crossed - half of them are about cats).
Get the latest inspiring stories via our awesome iOS app! Download Bored Panda app!
What do you think ?
Cesi Baca 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Don't be so quick to jump on people's bandwagon. This guys tree was pushing through the pavement on the CITY sidewalk. The city was not trying to hurt this man or kill anyone's precious tree. They were thinking of the public who might fall on there a*s stepping over the broken pavement.
Cindy DesGrosseilliers 7 years ago
There are a number of ways to solve it. The city just asked for it to be cut down. Not something most cities do with mature trees.
Cesi Baca 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Really! People aren't saying there are other things the city could've done. Like what exactly? Think people. Something is off about his story. He says he is an arborist. So then WHY DIDN'T HE DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT HIMSELF AND SAVE THE TREE. The reason the city destroyed the tree and charged him for it is because he failed to take care of the problem himself. Did they have to kill it? Probably not. But it wasn't the city's responsibility to spend time and money trying save Clyde, that responsibility belonged to clyde's dad once he saw it was f*****g up the sidewalk.
Oscar Finn 7 years ago
Please take into fact that the giant sequoia is native and uses a lot of symbiosis to live so its help the environment and not killing native trees or plants at all and is very good for native birds GO THINK IT THROUGH and nature was here before us deal with it we need to respect it although I'm not with this mans vengeful ideas his heart was in the right place your brain is not in the right place either. Also it doesn't matter what it looks like this poor man had this tree as family imagine if someone walked up to your child and took a chain saw to him this tree was his child and they made him kill it!!!
Load More Replies...
Chris Sanders 7 years ago
Mike, you just belittled someone's grief to make your own seem more important. A loss is a loss and shouldn't be determined by what/who was lost, but by the connection the person had to it.
Michael Webb 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Oscar Finn, apparently you do not know anyone who is a bonafide bereaved parent. I am one (he died at 8 of leukemia) and know many, many others. No matter how the man felt about his tree, it will never compare to the pain of a parent whose child has died. It is considered the most severe and traumatic loss a person can experience. See if your public library has "The Worst Loss" by Barbara Rosof and read it. It can also be ordered used--CHEAP--from the Amazon Marketplace. There is no loss, be it spouse, parent, sibling or other (and all of these are considered severe losses), much less a dog, a cat or a tree (as dear as they may be) compared to the death of one's child at any age. I've compared it to having one's guts ripped out and stomped on with cleats. I've talked with more than enough people in the 16 years since my son's death to know that no other death can be truly compared to the loss of one's child. Be careful with your comparisons, please, sir.
Jo Dod 7 years ago
I'm not trying to be argumentative, but I would also like to remind you (or even inform you if you never heard of it before!) That sometimes destroying trees it's good for the environment also. Don't believe me? In Ireland, ther i'm not trying to be argumentative, but I would also like to remind you (or even inform you if you never heard of it before!) That sometimes destroying trees it's good for the environment also. Don't believe me? In Ireland, and some inn scotland they have been working very hard to try to tear down a lot of trees in nurseries in places that you teac they have been working very hard to try to tear down a lot of trees in nurseries in places that used to be peat bogs. These bogs coincidentally are the most efficient C02 absorbing landscape ever. Not all environments that are pleasant to look at or walkable and refreshing are "best" for the environment. In Ireland's case, literally removing every single tree in sight and restoring it to an unwalkaboe swamp saved
Jorge Landivar 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
No it isn't. Trees aren't somehow magically good for the environment. If anything they are really bad for it, by increasing pollen pollution.
Mike Olson 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Its not excellent for the taxpayers and land owners who had nothing to do with this decision.
Andrew Keane 7 years ago
Hahaha, whatever! He's a taxpayer. He had to pay for his own trees destruction and the pavement and you don't see a problem with that?
Mike Olson 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Jerome Gondron- Wow talk about making judgements based on one comment. Im not a conservative, I just follow rules and accept the consequences.
Mike Olson 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Andrew Keane- No I dont. He doesnt own the sidewalk and if the tree he planted is destroying it then sorry, tree has to go. So you would be OK chipping in if the other trees have to be removed? ALSO, if he was such an arborist, im sure he could have saved parts and regrown it elsewhere.
Seaghán Ventura 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Cities pay good money when installing parks and landscaping. I know, because I'm directly involved with this in my own town. Ive been involved in both sides from the planting to the design and planning of managed landscapes, to the political process of parks money and personnel management. Random plantings in places not designed for trees is harmful and destroys the city-surveyed, planned, installed, and managed grounds which come from tax money and are designed to provide spaces for everyone, not a single anrgy arborist. We deal with this frequently when well-meaning peolple try to replant a gifted tree or their living Xmas tree, or dexorative species they personally feel should there. They spend further money managing these trees-- which will likely grow to harm the existing flora by shading them out, stealing water other plants need, dropping needles or leaves and changing the soil composition, and possibly encouraging damaging fauna or fungi to grow in the managed landscaping.
Adam Knapp 7 years ago
Don't wanna harm the existing flora, don't p**s off an arborist with a grudge. Seems simple enough.
Melinda Towne 7 years ago
To Ruth Holmes-Davitt: He planted the tree 30 years ago, perhaps the sidewalk didn't exist at that time. So maybe the question then should have been why they put the sidewalk where it would eventually be impacted by the tree roots?
Sharon Russell 7 years ago
You think you can manage nature better than nature itself? LOL I've got news for ya, bub.
Kapil Yadav 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
f**k face .... do u have any idea how similar ur thoughts and horse s**t are stupid f**k
Rupak Singha Roy 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
You are such a motherfuckiin diplomat... F**k you and F**k you and F**k you thrice. Die m**********r😈
Ruth Holmes-Davitt 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
If he is an Arborist why didn't he know that the roots would spread and chose a different tree? IF (and I think it's a pretty big IF) the story is true was he prepared to pay any medical bills arising from injuries caused to young children, the elderly etc who were likely to suffer injuries related to tripping? He's gleeful about the costs involved in repairing damage caused by his trees and removing the trees that he has planted. So he's upset about 'Clyde' but has happily planted trees simply so that they can be killed and that the money used is tax payers money that could of been spent on other services for the community. He's a nasty, spiteful, petty twat .
Abir Mandal 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
No one cares about your appeal to libtard tyranny, commie. Get a real job.
Francis Dullin 7 years ago
Wendy, the huge sum of money pertains to environmental reparations considering that Redwoods are endangered plant species. The mayor is lucky if he'd get away with simply paying for violating his obligation to uphold a federal law.
Aicel Millares 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
It's not excellent for the environment. Once the trees sprout, they'd be removed. That's some unnecessary killing of trees, and unnecessary use of funding. No one wins. not the environment, not the people. This revenge -just like any other revenge- is stupid.
Mike Olson 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
So you are OK with breaking rules Jerome? Im sure money would be important if it was coming out of your pocket.
Mike Olson 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
So Andrew and Jerome- You see no problem with people being effected by this even though they had nothing to do with it? Im all for saving a tree but come on? Why should people with nothing to do with this be forced to pay up? Please enlighten me with why this is OK to break the rules in this case?
Crystalshine Marie 7 years ago
Actually, no, Mike. There are plenty of types of redwoods that CAN be cut down, incurring costs to cut them down, also... the types of trees he chose, like the Giant redwoods, are endangered species, and they can NOT be cut down by anyone in California, including the government. So there will be no removal costs, as once the tree is rooted firmly, they are protected. Which is why he waited to announce it after their root had firmly spread. :)
Don Lugians 7 years ago
You made this statement "Andrew Keane- No I dont. He doesnt own the sidewalk and if the tree he planted is destroying it then sorry, tree has to go....." I don't live there so I dont know for sure however, the tree is 30 years old correct? How old is the sidewalk? Was it put there prior to 1987? So your saying if city council decides to push sidewalk on your front lawn and oh well Sorry Andrew you house has to go its destroying the sidewalk.
F. Elaine Anderson 7 years ago
Under exactly what circumstances would you feel it is ethically correct to truly become "all for saving a tree"???? I wipe away a tear for those poor, poor people who might feel themselves to be inconvenienced by a few more majestic trees being brought into this world. Poor people. Poor you. Defender of the values of civilization, time is up for you and your ilk. The spirit of justice has abandoned you.
Austin Mabry 7 years ago
Who are these people who "had nothing to do with it"? And what rules are being broken?
Greg Costello 7 years ago
Mike, you are a twat, you should hide in the corner of your room, and not speak, let alone be seen in public. No Mike, just no. SMH - somewhere in the world a woman gives birth to a sped like this every 5 minutes, and she must be found and stopped immediately, before the problem gets worse.
Pam Ferdinand 7 years ago
He planted California redwoods, not Giant redwoods. And as far as I know, they are regularly cut down by loggers. They are currently considered "only" vulnerable, not endangered.
Tracy Rowe 7 years ago
seriously, you're responding to these commentors like they talked about your sister
Cesi Baca 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Don't be so quick to jump on people's bandwagon. This guys tree was pushing through the pavement on the CITY sidewalk. The city was not trying to hurt this man or kill anyone's precious tree. They were thinking of the public who might fall on there a*s stepping over the broken pavement.
Cindy DesGrosseilliers 7 years ago
There are a number of ways to solve it. The city just asked for it to be cut down. Not something most cities do with mature trees.
Cesi Baca 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Really! People aren't saying there are other things the city could've done. Like what exactly? Think people. Something is off about his story. He says he is an arborist. So then WHY DIDN'T HE DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT HIMSELF AND SAVE THE TREE. The reason the city destroyed the tree and charged him for it is because he failed to take care of the problem himself. Did they have to kill it? Probably not. But it wasn't the city's responsibility to spend time and money trying save Clyde, that responsibility belonged to clyde's dad once he saw it was f*****g up the sidewalk.
Oscar Finn 7 years ago
Please take into fact that the giant sequoia is native and uses a lot of symbiosis to live so its help the environment and not killing native trees or plants at all and is very good for native birds GO THINK IT THROUGH and nature was here before us deal with it we need to respect it although I'm not with this mans vengeful ideas his heart was in the right place your brain is not in the right place either. Also it doesn't matter what it looks like this poor man had this tree as family imagine if someone walked up to your child and took a chain saw to him this tree was his child and they made him kill it!!!
Load More Replies... Chris Sanders 7 years ago
Mike, you just belittled someone's grief to make your own seem more important. A loss is a loss and shouldn't be determined by what/who was lost, but by the connection the person had to it.
Michael Webb 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Oscar Finn, apparently you do not know anyone who is a bonafide bereaved parent. I am one (he died at 8 of leukemia) and know many, many others. No matter how the man felt about his tree, it will never compare to the pain of a parent whose child has died. It is considered the most severe and traumatic loss a person can experience. See if your public library has "The Worst Loss" by Barbara Rosof and read it. It can also be ordered used--CHEAP--from the Amazon Marketplace. There is no loss, be it spouse, parent, sibling or other (and all of these are considered severe losses), much less a dog, a cat or a tree (as dear as they may be) compared to the death of one's child at any age. I've compared it to having one's guts ripped out and stomped on with cleats. I've talked with more than enough people in the 16 years since my son's death to know that no other death can be truly compared to the loss of one's child. Be careful with your comparisons, please, sir.
Jo Dod 7 years ago
I'm not trying to be argumentative, but I would also like to remind you (or even inform you if you never heard of it before!) That sometimes destroying trees it's good for the environment also. Don't believe me? In Ireland, ther i'm not trying to be argumentative, but I would also like to remind you (or even inform you if you never heard of it before!) That sometimes destroying trees it's good for the environment also. Don't believe me? In Ireland, and some inn scotland they have been working very hard to try to tear down a lot of trees in nurseries in places that you teac they have been working very hard to try to tear down a lot of trees in nurseries in places that used to be peat bogs. These bogs coincidentally are the most efficient C02 absorbing landscape ever. Not all environments that are pleasant to look at or walkable and refreshing are "best" for the environment. In Ireland's case, literally removing every single tree in sight and restoring it to an unwalkaboe swamp saved
Jorge Landivar 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
No it isn't. Trees aren't somehow magically good for the environment. If anything they are really bad for it, by increasing pollen pollution.
Mike Olson 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Its not excellent for the taxpayers and land owners who had nothing to do with this decision.
Andrew Keane 7 years ago
Hahaha, whatever! He's a taxpayer. He had to pay for his own trees destruction and the pavement and you don't see a problem with that?
Mike Olson 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Jerome Gondron- Wow talk about making judgements based on one comment. Im not a conservative, I just follow rules and accept the consequences.
Mike Olson 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Andrew Keane- No I dont. He doesnt own the sidewalk and if the tree he planted is destroying it then sorry, tree has to go. So you would be OK chipping in if the other trees have to be removed? ALSO, if he was such an arborist, im sure he could have saved parts and regrown it elsewhere.
Seaghán Ventura 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Cities pay good money when installing parks and landscaping. I know, because I'm directly involved with this in my own town. Ive been involved in both sides from the planting to the design and planning of managed landscapes, to the political process of parks money and personnel management. Random plantings in places not designed for trees is harmful and destroys the city-surveyed, planned, installed, and managed grounds which come from tax money and are designed to provide spaces for everyone, not a single anrgy arborist. We deal with this frequently when well-meaning peolple try to replant a gifted tree or their living Xmas tree, or dexorative species they personally feel should there. They spend further money managing these trees-- which will likely grow to harm the existing flora by shading them out, stealing water other plants need, dropping needles or leaves and changing the soil composition, and possibly encouraging damaging fauna or fungi to grow in the managed landscaping.
Adam Knapp 7 years ago
Don't wanna harm the existing flora, don't p**s off an arborist with a grudge. Seems simple enough.
Melinda Towne 7 years ago
To Ruth Holmes-Davitt: He planted the tree 30 years ago, perhaps the sidewalk didn't exist at that time. So maybe the question then should have been why they put the sidewalk where it would eventually be impacted by the tree roots?
Sharon Russell 7 years ago
You think you can manage nature better than nature itself? LOL I've got news for ya, bub.
Kapil Yadav 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
f**k face .... do u have any idea how similar ur thoughts and horse s**t are stupid f**k
Rupak Singha Roy 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
You are such a motherfuckiin diplomat... F**k you and F**k you and F**k you thrice. Die m**********r😈
Ruth Holmes-Davitt 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
If he is an Arborist why didn't he know that the roots would spread and chose a different tree? IF (and I think it's a pretty big IF) the story is true was he prepared to pay any medical bills arising from injuries caused to young children, the elderly etc who were likely to suffer injuries related to tripping? He's gleeful about the costs involved in repairing damage caused by his trees and removing the trees that he has planted. So he's upset about 'Clyde' but has happily planted trees simply so that they can be killed and that the money used is tax payers money that could of been spent on other services for the community. He's a nasty, spiteful, petty twat .
Abir Mandal 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
No one cares about your appeal to libtard tyranny, commie. Get a real job.
Francis Dullin 7 years ago
Wendy, the huge sum of money pertains to environmental reparations considering that Redwoods are endangered plant species. The mayor is lucky if he'd get away with simply paying for violating his obligation to uphold a federal law.
Aicel Millares 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
It's not excellent for the environment. Once the trees sprout, they'd be removed. That's some unnecessary killing of trees, and unnecessary use of funding. No one wins. not the environment, not the people. This revenge -just like any other revenge- is stupid.
Mike Olson 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
So you are OK with breaking rules Jerome? Im sure money would be important if it was coming out of your pocket.
Mike Olson 7 years ago
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
So Andrew and Jerome- You see no problem with people being effected by this even though they had nothing to do with it? Im all for saving a tree but come on? Why should people with nothing to do with this be forced to pay up? Please enlighten me with why this is OK to break the rules in this case?
Crystalshine Marie 7 years ago
Actually, no, Mike. There are plenty of types of redwoods that CAN be cut down, incurring costs to cut them down, also... the types of trees he chose, like the Giant redwoods, are endangered species, and they can NOT be cut down by anyone in California, including the government. So there will be no removal costs, as once the tree is rooted firmly, they are protected. Which is why he waited to announce it after their root had firmly spread. :)
Don Lugians 7 years ago
You made this statement "Andrew Keane- No I dont. He doesnt own the sidewalk and if the tree he planted is destroying it then sorry, tree has to go....." I don't live there so I dont know for sure however, the tree is 30 years old correct? How old is the sidewalk? Was it put there prior to 1987? So your saying if city council decides to push sidewalk on your front lawn and oh well Sorry Andrew you house has to go its destroying the sidewalk.
F. Elaine Anderson 7 years ago
Under exactly what circumstances would you feel it is ethically correct to truly become "all for saving a tree"???? I wipe away a tear for those poor, poor people who might feel themselves to be inconvenienced by a few more majestic trees being brought into this world. Poor people. Poor you. Defender of the values of civilization, time is up for you and your ilk. The spirit of justice has abandoned you.
Austin Mabry 7 years ago
Who are these people who "had nothing to do with it"? And what rules are being broken?
Greg Costello 7 years ago
Mike, you are a twat, you should hide in the corner of your room, and not speak, let alone be seen in public. No Mike, just no. SMH - somewhere in the world a woman gives birth to a sped like this every 5 minutes, and she must be found and stopped immediately, before the problem gets worse.
Pam Ferdinand 7 years ago
He planted California redwoods, not Giant redwoods. And as far as I know, they are regularly cut down by loggers. They are currently considered "only" vulnerable, not endangered.
Tracy Rowe 7 years ago
seriously, you're responding to these commentors like they talked about your sister
Related on Bored Panda
932
555