Hi all, SORRY to come to this one so late and thanks to 'Monkey D' from prompting me.
Sorry also for any duplication I may subject you to as I haven't read all the related posts.
I think everyone working in the tree care industry has a responsibility to consider, very carefuly, the ecological aspects AND the hazards caused by deadwood etc. and, after so doing, make a professional judgement of what is required on a 'job by job' / 'site by site' basis.
My interpretation of the removal of the 'crown clean' term from the standards is that it introduces a principle of retaining deadwood where appropraite and beneficial so to do...again a matter for your professional judgement.
The term is a nice catch all thereby avoidng the need to be more specifc and gives some free reign in terms of what we do BUT with the industry moving forward and gaining increased professioanl recognition and status, to the benefit of all, we need to raise the bar and improve our tree work specifications such that trees are dealt with individually.
If you still require to undertake 'CC' then this can be done (see sects. 7.3, 7.4, 7.12 & 7.13) but I would avoid using the term and specify these individually.
Lastly there are parts of this standard that place a greater onus on us, inc. more time and more thought, but please see this as an opportunity to increase the gap between the tree care professional, who can and understands, and the 'other' person, who cannot.
Cheers all and thanks for taking the time to read this post...u feeling sleepy now...oops!
Paul