Dead-wooding a Hungarian oak

Spent yesterday in a large old Quercus frainetto (Hungarian oak) removing dead-wood.

How does that link up with my ecological viewpoint?

Pros of dead-wooding:
- the oak was right next to and thus had part of the crown over a well-used path
- the other side of the canopy was over a lawn which is very inviting to sit on/play on in the summer
- we had no idea how long the dead-wood had been there and so was it close to failing?
- Alex Shigo - Modern Arboriculture - "dead branch removal is a health treatment because the dead wood is an energy source - cellulose, lignin, glucose - for fungi" (p.102)
- in a Botanic Gardens, where there is more of an emphasis on appearance, removing dead wood may make a tree more aesthetically pleasing

Cons of dead-wooding:
- oaks are renowned for holding onto dead wood for a long time
- dead branches will most likely fail in high winds - and the Gardens shut if winds are above 30mph
- the dead limbs provided habitat for insects, lichens, and yes even fungi (let us not forget that fungi are biodiversity too and as such should not be marginalised)
- on the point of fungi, the tree will already have compartmentalised off the dead branch (although this can of course be overcome)

In this case, despite my tendencies towards keeping trees natural and leaving deadwood for the bugs, beasties and epiphytes, perhaps we were right to remove large dead branches, given the high volume of pedestrian traffic around the tree. However, I compromised by not touching any shorter or smaller bits of dead wood (e.g. dead stubs of branches that had naturally snapped off), on the basis that these have less weight and are less of a lever, so are less likely to drop off.