But, regardless, I think any rule that is so ambiguous that it is violated clearly and regularly, but no one thinks is an actual violation, is probably something of an issue. Many times that you take a stance with your foot where you are moving some branches, etc., you could move less by doing something like only putting your toe on the lie, using your hand as the supporting point, sitting or lying down fully so that your are fully underneath the branches, etc. If you can explicitly state that these are violations, but that they shouldn't be called, it seems like an issue to me. You are basically saying there are the rules, but we actually must play by "the rules". And trying to keep the rules too simple leads to issues like pine cones not being moveable.
Note that I'm not talking about things like jump putt violations that may be clear on replay , but not to the naked eye. That's a different issue.
If the intent of the rule is to stop people from clearing room for their swing or disc, but isn't supposed to prevent you from taking a stance otherwise, I would think it would perhaps be best to just go ahead and state it.