Wildlife Abounds in Chernobyl Radioactive Zone

Today wildlife scientists have published a letter in the Journal, Current Biology, which says that the “Chernobyl disaster area is home to a rich and varied wildlife community”. It is likely not alone due to rapidly increasing wolf populations. The city was inhabited by 16,000 people.

“The data that they have presented doesn’t actually show that the area is teeming with wildlife”, he said. Through all of this, a few animals still managed to survive the destruction, chaos and radioactive materials that had marred their land.

In other words, whatever the fallout from the disaster may have been, it turned out that the absence of humans was more than enough to compensate. According to several previous studies, the major radiation has indeed led to significant reductions in wildlife populations.

A study has suggested that nuclear accidents do not affect wildlife the same way they affect humans. This is an admittedly bold statement, considering the damage caused by radiation in the exclusion area. The roe deer population has climbed tenfold since 1996. There have also been confirmed reports of wolves roaming the lands.

Walking around the exclusion zone is like being in “a national park without the people”, Hinton said.

Researchers counted the animals by aerial observations of the large zone devastated by a fire and an explosion of one of the plant’s nuclear reactors.

And one researcher not involved with the study told New Scientist, “The striking Chernobyl findings reveal that nature can flourish if people will just leave it alone”, said Bill Laurance of James Cook University in Cairns, Australia. This leaves only the fittest being able to roam the earth and survive. However, animals faced many devastating effects at that time and during the immediate aftermath of the explosion. However, the news isn’t as happy for all animals in the region. Whether radiation or just a lack of humans had anything to do with that is unclear.

Biologist Timothy Mousseau at the University of South Carolina said Smith’s research presents an overly optimistic view of the situation around Chernobyl.

The publication also seems to drive a nail into the coffin of at least two hypothesis previously made over the effects of radiation, which were limited to small sections of the city rather than the entire area. It is important to note, however, that other researchers have pointed out that there are many flaws within this particular study.

He added: “We’re not saying radiation is good for animals, but human habitation and exploitation of the landscape is worse”. “That dates back to when humans were prey”. Because of this, it may be misleading to assume all wildlife is thriving.