I went past this earlier today!! It appeared to be a "bonfire size/type" fire in someones allottment/shed!!
Surely the person who started the fire can be prosecuted by FGW▸ /BTP▸ for the delay costs to FGW and inconvienience to many etc??
If it was a deliberate malicous act then I hope that they are prosecuted, and suitably punished.
If however it was an accident, as appears probable, then is it proper or legal to prosecute someone for an accident to their garden shed etc ?
The problem appears to be an over reaction to relatively small or low risk fires within sight of the railway. Fires involving acetylene cylinders can be very dangerous and evacuation of a significant area is prudent. Fires known to involve acetylene cylinders are fortunatly very rare, unfortunatly the "elfansafety" now seem to regard most fires as potentialy involving acetylene cylinders, unless it can be proved that no such are present.
Cylinders of others gases can of course be dangerous in a fire, but the risks are less.
Present day "elfansafety" regards all gas cylinders as being as dangerous as acetylene, after all you cant have too much safety can you !
Acetylene cylinders that have been heated can explode some time latter, even after cooling, other gas cylinders are relatively safe afterwards.
Propane cylinders used to used on the railway for all sorts of purposes (points heating, worksite lighting, heating remote huts and cabins, on train catering etc.) and were regarded as relatively low risk. Now that the railway has ceased regular use of propane, it has suddenly become very dangerous.