> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7878106.stm
>
> [WS:] Strange that they blame "arsonists" for that. I find it hard
> to believe - it is just too many fires at the same time. I think
> the arsonist trope is diverting public attention from a more likely
> human culprit of so many deaths - sprawled settlements. Bush fires
> are a natural phenomenon, but building homes in areas prone to such
> disasters is very risky (albeit very profitable for developers).
The severe fires to the north and east of Melbourne on Saturday were in the foothills of the Great Dividing Range (actually, not that Great ...), say 50km or so from the bayside centre of Melbourne, and overwhelmingly the loss of houses was in and around small old timber towns, minor farming hamlets and localities that appeal to the lifestyle set. One of the largely razed towns appears to have been a haven for the alternative set in the 1970s (mud brick houses and so on).
In other words, no developer housing is affected. There is ample room for housing development on the farmland that surrounds the city.
As for arson as a cause, all I know is that cop, academic, media and popular myth holds that this is a very common cause of bush fires in Australia.
If looking for a take away from this episode another angle may be whether or not the record breaking temperatures in south-eastern Australia over the last week or two provides any local evidence of global warming. Insurance companies and numerous scientists appear to take it as a given that it is.
Ian (safe and sound in inner Melbourne).