Editing Chernobyl exclusion zone (section)

==Radioactive contamination==
{{See also|Polesie State Radioecological Reserve}}
The territory of the zone is polluted unevenly. Spots of hyperintensive pollution were created first by wind and rain spreading radioactive dust at the time of the accident, and subsequently by numerous burial sites for various material and equipment used in decontamination. Zone authorities pay attention to protecting such spots from tourists, scrap hunters, and wildfires, but admit that some dangerous burial sites remain unmapped, and only recorded in the memories of the (aging) [[Chernobyl liquidators]].

===Flora and fauna===
{{See also|Chernobyl disaster#Environmental impact|Effects of the Chernobyl disaster#Long-term effects on plant and animal health}}[[File:Chernobyl fox 2016 - 3.jpg|thumb|A wild fox being fed by a tourist in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone]]
There has been an ongoing scientific debate about the extent to which [[flora]] and [[fauna]] of the zone were affected by the radioactive contamination that followed the accident.<ref name="Zimmer"/><ref name="Baker"/> As noted by Baker and Wickliffe, one of many issues is differentiating between negative effects of Chernobyl radiation and effects of changes in farming activities resulting from human evacuation.<ref name="Baker"/>

{{blockquote|"Twenty-five years after the Chernobyl meltdown, the scientific community has not yet been able to provide a clear understanding of the spectrum of ecological effects created by that radiological disaster."<ref name="Baker">{{cite journal |last1=Baker |first1=Robert J. |last2=Wickliffe |first2=Jeffrey K. |title=Wildlife and Chernobyl: The scientific evidence for minimal impacts |journal=Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists |date=14 April 2011 |url=https://thebulletin.org/wildlife-and-chernobyl-scientific-evidence-minimal-impacts |access-date=20 June 2018 |archive-date=14 February 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170214222328/http://thebulletin.org/wildlife-and-chernobyl-scientific-evidence-minimal-impacts |url-status=dead }}</ref>}}

Near the facility, a dense cloud of radioactive dust killed off a large area of [[Scots pine]] trees; the rusty orange color of the dead trees led to the nickname "[[Red Forest|The Red Forest]]" (''Рудий ліс'').<ref name="Baker"/> The Red Forest was among the world's most radioactive places; to reduce the hazard, the Red Forest was bulldozed and the highly radioactive wood was buried, though the soil continues to emit significant radiation.<ref name="Bird">{{cite journal |last1=Bird |first1=Winifred A. |last2=Little |first2=Jane Braxton |title=A Tale of Two Forests: Addressing Postnuclear Radiation at Chernobyl and Fukushima |journal=Environmental Health Perspectives |date=March 2013 |volume=121 |issue=3 |pages=a78–a85 |pmc=3621180 |doi=10.1289/ehp.121-a78|pmid=23454631 }}</ref><ref name="Mycio">{{cite book |last1=Mycio |first1=M. |title=Wormwood Forest: A Natural History of Chernobyl |url=https://archive.org/details/wormwoodforest00mary |url-access=registration |date=2005 |publisher=Joseph Henry Press |location=Washington, DC|isbn=9780309094306 }}</ref> Other species in the same area, such as [[birch trees]], survived, indicating that plant species may vary considerably in their sensitivity to radiation.<ref name="Baker"/>
[[File:Horses in Chernobyl, Ukraine.jpg|thumb|right|Przewalski's horses in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone. The [[Duga radar|Duga radar receiver]] can be seen in the background.]]
Cases of [[mutant]] deformity in animals of the zone include partial [[albinism]] and other external malformations in [[swallow]]s<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Møller|first1=A. P.|last2=Mousseau|first2=T. A.|title=Albinism and phenotype of barn swallows (''Hirundo rustica'') from Chernobyl|journal=[[Evolution (journal)|Evolution]]|date=October 2001|volume=55|issue=10|pages=2097–2104|doi=10.1554/0014-3820(2001)055[2097:aapobs]2.0.co;2|pmid=11761068|s2cid=20027410 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Møller|first1=A. P.|last2=Mousseau|first2=T. A.|last3=de Lope|first3=F.|last4=Saino|first4=N.|title=Elevated frequency of abnormalities in barn swallows from Chernobyl|journal=[[Biology Letters]]|date=22 August 2007|volume=3|issue=4|pages=414–417|doi=10.1098/rsbl.2007.0136|pmc=1994720|pmid=17439847}}
</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6946210.stm|title=Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven'|last=Kinver|first=Mark|date=14 August 2007|work=[[BBC News]]|access-date=31 October 2015}}</ref> and insect mutations.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.wissenskunst.ch/en/tschernobyl.htm |title=Cornelia Hesse Honegger: Aktuelles |publisher=Wissenskunst.ch |access-date=2015-10-31 |archive-date=13 February 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120213133531/http://www.wissenskunst.ch/en/tschernobyl.htm |url-status=dead }}</ref> A study of several hundred birds belonging to 48 different species also demonstrated that birds inhabiting highly radioactively contaminated areas had smaller brains compared to birds from clean areas.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Møller|first1=Anders Pape|last2=Bonisoli-Alquati|first2=Andea|last3=Rudolfsen|first3=Geir|last4=Mousseau|first4=Timothy A.|year=2011|title=Chernobyl Birds Have Smaller Brains|journal=[[PLoS ONE]]|volume=6|issue=2|pages=e16862|doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0016862|pmc=3033907|pmid=21390202|bibcode=2011PLoSO...616862M|doi-access=free}}
</ref>

A reduction in the density and the abundance of animals in highly radioactively contaminated areas has been reported for several [[taxa]], including birds,<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Møller|first1=A. P.|last2=Mousseau|first2=T. A.|title=Species richness and abundance of forest birds in relation to radiation at Chernobyl|journal=[[Biology Letters]]|date=22 October 2007|volume=3|issue=5|pages=483–486|doi=10.1098/rsbl.2007.0226|pmc=2394539|pmid=17698449}}
</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Møller|first=A. P.|author2=T. A. Mousseau|title=Reduced abundance of raptors in radioactively contaminated areas near Chernobyl|journal=[[Journal of Ornithology]]|date=January 2009|volume=150|issue=1|pages=239–246|doi=10.1007/s10336-008-0343-5|bibcode=2009JOrni.150..239M |s2cid=34029630}}
</ref> insects, spiders,<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Møller|first1=Anders Pape|last2=Mousseau|first2=Timothy A.|year=2009|title=Reduced abundance of insects and spiders linked to radiation at Chernobyl 20 years after the accident|journal=[[Biology Letters]]|publication-date=18 March 2009|volume=5|issue=3|pages=356–359|doi=10.1098/rsbl.2008.0778|pmc=2679916|pmid=19324644}}
</ref> and mammals.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Møller|first1=Anders Pape|last2=Mousseau|first2=Timothy A.|title=Efficiency of bio-indicators for low-level radiation under field conditions|journal=[[Ecological Indicators]]|date=March 2011|volume=11|issue=2|pages=424–430|doi=10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.06.013|bibcode=2011EcInd..11..424M }}
</ref> In birds, which are an efficient [[bioindicator]], a negative correlation has been reported between background radiation and bird species richness.<ref name="Morelli">{{cite journal |last1=Morelli |first1=Federico |last2=Mousseau |first2=Timothy A. |last3=Møller |first3=Anders Pape |title=Cuckoos vs. top predators as prime bioindicators of biodiversity in disturbed environments |journal=Journal of Environmental Radioactivity |date=October 2017 |volume=177 |pages=158–164 |doi=10.1016/j.jenvrad.2017.06.029 |pmid=28686944 |bibcode=2017JEnvR.177..158M |s2cid=40377542 }}</ref> Scientists such as Anders Pape Møller ([[University of Paris-Sud]]) and Timothy Mousseau ([[University of South Carolina]]) report that birds and smaller animals such as [[vole]]s may be particularly affected by radioactivity.<ref name="Wendle"/>

Møller is the first author on 9 of the 20 most-cited articles relating to the ecology, evolution and non-human biology in the Chernobyl area.<ref name="AR2021">{{cite journal |last1=Mousseau |first1=Timothy A. |title=The Biology of Chernobyl |journal=Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics |date=3 November 2021 |volume=52 |issue=1 |pages=87–109 |doi=10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110218-024827 |s2cid=238723709 |issn=1543-592X |quote="Table 1"|doi-access=free }}</ref> However, some of Møller's research has been criticized as flawed.<ref name="Smith">{{cite journal |last1=Smith |first1=J. T. |title=Is Chernobyl radiation really causing negative individual and population-level effects on barn swallows? |journal=Biology Letters |date=23 February 2008 |volume=4 |issue=1 |pages=63–64 |doi=10.1098/rsbl.2007.0430 |pmid=18042513 |pmc=2412919 }}</ref> Prior to his work at Chernobyl, Møller was accused of falsifying data in a 1998 paper about asymmetry in oak leaves, which he retracted in 2001.<ref name="Vogel">{{cite journal |last1=Vogel |first1=Gretchen |last2=Proffitt |first2=Fiona |last3=Stone |first3=Richard |title=Ecologists Rocked by Misconduct Finding |journal=Science |date=28 Jan 2004 |url=https://www.science.org/content/article/ecologists-rocked-misconduct-finding |access-date=17 February 2022 |language=en}}</ref><ref name="Borrell">{{cite journal |last1=Borrell |first1=Brendan |title=A Fluctuating Reality: Accused of fraud, Anders Pape Møller has traveled from superstar evolutionary biologist to pariah |journal=The Scientist |date=2007 |volume=21 |issue=1 |pages=26– |url=http://www.jorgenrabol.dk/files/thescientist1.pdf |access-date=17 February 2022 |archive-date=17 February 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220217211258/http://www.jorgenrabol.dk/files/thescientist1.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref name="de Lope">{{cite journal |last1=Møller |first1=Anders P. |last2=de Lope |first2=F. |title=Herbivory Affects Developmental Instability of Stone Oak, Quercus rotundifolia |journal=Oikos |date=1998 |volume=82 |issue=2 |pages=246–252 |doi=10.2307/3546964 |jstor=3546964 |bibcode=1998Oikos..82..246M |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/3546964 |access-date=17 February 2022 |issn=0030-1299|url-access=subscription }}{{Retracted|doi=10.1034/j.1600-0706.2001.920317.x|intentional=yes}}</ref> In 2004, the [[Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty]] (DCSD) reported that Møller was guilty of "scientific dishonesty". The [[French National Centre for Scientific Research]] (CNRS) subsequently concluded that there was insufficient evidence to establish either guilt or innocence.<ref name="Vogel"/><ref name="Higginbotham">{{cite magazine |last1=Higginbotham |first1=Adam |title=Is Chernobyl a Wild Kingdom or a Radioactive Den of Decay? |url=https://www.wired.com/2011/04/ff-chernobyl/ |access-date=17 February 2022 |magazine=Wired |date=April 14, 2011}}</ref><ref name="Odling-Smee">{{cite journal |last1=Odling-Smee |first1=Lucy |last2=Giles |first2=Jim |last3=Fuyuno |first3=Ichiko |last4=Cyranoski |first4=David |last5=Marris |first5=Emma |title=Where are they now? |journal=Nature |date=1 January 2007 |volume=445 |issue=7125 |pages=244–245 |doi=10.1038/445244a |pmid=17230161 |bibcode=2007Natur.445..244O |s2cid=4414512 |language=en |issn=1476-4687|doi-access=free }}</ref> Strongly held opinions about Møller and his work have contributed to the difficulty of reaching a scientific consensus on the effects of radiation on wildlife in the Exclusion Zone.<ref name="Zimmer">{{cite journal |last1=Zimmer |first1=Katarina |title=Scientists can't agree about Chernobyl's impact on wildlife |journal=Knowable Magazine |date=7 February 2022 |doi=10.1146/knowable-020422-1 |url=https://knowablemagazine.org/article/food-environment/2022/scientists-cant-agree-about-chernobyls-impact-wildlife |doi-access=free |access-date=17 February 2022}}</ref>

More recently, the populations of large mammals have increased due to a significant reduction of human interference.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4923342.stm|title=Wildlife defies Chernobyl radiation|last=Mulvey|first=Stephen|date=20 April 2006|work=[[BBC News]]|access-date=31 October 2015}}</ref><ref name="Wendle">{{cite news|url=https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/060418-chernobyl-wildlife-thirty-year-anniversary-science|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210223045247/https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/060418-chernobyl-wildlife-thirty-year-anniversary-science|url-status=dead|archive-date=23 February 2021|title=Animals Rule Chernobyl Three Decades After Nuclear Disaster|last1=Wendle|first1=John|date=18 April 2016|work=[[National Geographic]]|access-date=20 June 2018}}</ref> The populations of traditional [[Polesia]]n animals (such as the [[gray wolf]], [[badger]], [[wild boar]], [[roe deer]], [[white-tailed eagle]], [[black stork]], [[western marsh harrier]], [[short-eared owl]], [[red deer]], [[moose]], [[great egret]], [[whooper swan]], [[least weasel]], [[common kestrel]], and [[beaver]]) have multiplied enormously and begun expanding outside the zone.<ref name="Lavars">{{cite news|url=https://newatlas.com/wildlife-chernobyl-wasteland/39718/|title=Deer, wolves and other wildlife thriving in Chernobyl exclusion zone|last1=Lavars|first1=Nick|date=6 October 2015|work=New Atlas|access-date=20 June 2018}}</ref><ref name="Deryabina">{{cite journal|last1=Deryabina|first1=T.G.|last2=Kuchmel|first2=S.V.|last3=Nagorskaya|first3=L.L.|last4=Hinton|first4=T.G.|last5=Beasley|first5=J.C.|last6=Lerebours|first6=A.|last7=Smith|first7=J.T.|date=October 2015|title=Long-term census data reveal abundant wildlife populations at Chernobyl|journal=[[Current Biology]]|volume=25|issue=19|pages=R824–R826|doi=10.1016/j.cub.2015.08.017|pmid=26439334|doi-access=free|bibcode=2015CBio...25.R824D }}</ref> The zone is considered as a classic example of an [[involuntary park]].<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.economist.com/news/2010/02/08/conflict-conservation|title=Conflict conservation|date=8 February 2010|newspaper=[[The Economist]]|access-date=20 June 2018}}</ref>

The return of wolves and other animals to the area is being studied by scientists such as Marina Shkvyria ([[National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine]]), Sergey Gaschak (Chernobyl Centre in Ukraine), and Jim Beasley ([[University of Georgia]]). [[Camera trap]]s have been installed and are used to record the presence of species. Studies of wolves, which are concentrated in higher-radiation areas near the center of the exclusion zone, may enable researchers to better assess relationships between radiation levels, animal health, and population dynamics.<ref name="Distillations"/><ref name="Wendle"/>

The area also houses herds of [[European bison]] (native to the area) and Przewalski's horses (foreign to the area, as the extinct [[tarpan]] was the native wild horse) released there after the accident. Some accounts refer to the reappearance of extremely rare [[Eurasian lynx|native lynx]], and there are videos of [[brown bear]]s and their cubs, an animal not seen in the area for more than a century.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-32452085|title=Cameras reveal the secret lives of Chernobyl's wildlife|last=Kinver|first=Mark|date=26 April 2015|work=[[BBC News]]|access-date=12 June 2016}}</ref> Special [[game warden]] units are organized to protect and control them. No scientific study has been conducted on the population dynamics of these species.

The rivers and lakes of the zone pose a significant threat of spreading polluted [[silt]] during spring floods. They are systematically secured by [[Levee|dikes]].

===Grass and forest fires===
[[File:Chernobyl_Exclusion_Zone_Rosoha_Forest_fire,_2020-04-13.jpg|thumb|Forest fire on 4 April 2020]]
It is known that fires can make contamination mobile again.<ref name="Dusha-Gudym-1992"/><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.maik.ru/abstract/radchem/4/radchem0102_abstract.pdf |title=Forest Fire as a Factor of Environmental Redistribution of Radionuclides Originating from Chernobyl Accident |publisher=Maik.ru |access-date=2015-10-31 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090327135945/http://www.maik.ru/abstract/radchem/4/radchem0102_abstract.pdf |archive-date=27 March 2009 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.fire.uni-freiburg.de/iffn/country/rus/rus_16.htm|title=News from the Forest Fire Situation in the Radioactively Contaminated Regions|first=Eduard P.|last=Davidenko|author2=Johann Georg Goldammer|date=January 1994|access-date=3 May 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090426031324/http://www.fire.uni-freiburg.de/iffn/country/rus/rus_16.htm|archive-date=26 April 2009|url-status=dead|df=dmy-all}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Radioactive fires threaten Russia and Europe|url=http://newsfromrussia.com/main/2002/09/18/36851.html|date=18 September 2002|publisher=Pravda.ru|first=Mikhail|last=Antonov|author2=Maria Gousseva|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090502031128/http://newsfromrussia.com/main/2002/09/18/36851.html|archive-date=2 May 2009}}</ref> In particular, V.I. Yoschenko ''et al.'' reported on the possibility of increased mobility of [[caesium]], [[strontium]], and plutonium due to [[grass fire|grass]] and [[forest fire]]s.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Yoschenko | display-authors = etal   | year = 2006 | title =Resuspension and redistribution of radionuclides during grassland and forest fires in the Chernobyl exclusion zone: part I. Fire experiments | journal = Journal of Environmental Radioactivity | volume = 86 | issue = 2| pages = 143–163 | doi=10.1016/j.jenvrad.2005.08.003 | pmid=16213067| bibcode = 2006JEnvR..86..143Y }}</ref> As an experiment, fires were set and the levels of the radioactivity in the air downwind of these fires were measured.

Grass and forest fires have happened inside the contaminated zone, releasing [[radioactive fallout]] into the atmosphere. In 1986, a series of fires destroyed {{convert|2,336|ha|acre|0}} of forest, and several other fires have since burned within the {{convert|30|km|mi|0|abbr=on}} zone. A serious fire in early May 1992 affected {{convert|500|ha|acre|-1|abbr=on}} of land, including {{convert|270|ha|acre|abbr=on}} of forest. This resulted in a great increase in the levels of caesium-137 in airborne dust.<ref name="Dusha-Gudym-1992">{{cite web|url=http://www.fire.uni-freiburg.de/iffn/country/rus/rus_7.htm|title=Forest Fires on the Areas Contaminated by Radionuclides from the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant Accident|last=Dusha-Gudym|first=Sergei I.|date=August 1992|work=IFFN|pages=No.&nbsp;7, p.&nbsp;4–6|publisher=Global Fire Monitoring Center (GFMC)|access-date=2008-06-18|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080610173251/http://www.fire.uni-freiburg.de/iffn/country/rus/rus_7.htm|archive-date=10 June 2008|url-status=dead|df=dmy-all}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.fire.uni-freiburg.de/iffn/iffn_32/20-Dusha-Gudym.pdf |title= Transport of Radioactive Materials by Wildland fires in the Chernobyl Accident Zone: How to Address the Problem |access-date= 3 May 2012 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20090327135944/http://www.fire.uni-freiburg.de/iffn/iffn_32/20-Dusha-Gudym.pdf |archive-date= 27 March 2009 |url-status= dead |df= dmy-all }}&nbsp;{{small|(416&nbsp;KB)}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.ppoz.pl/down/pwa/fr506a.pdf |title= Chernobyl Forests. Two Decades After the Contamination |url-status= dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20070629154237/http://www.ppoz.pl/down/pwa/fr506a.pdf |archive-date= 29 June 2007 }}&nbsp;{{small|(139&nbsp;KB)}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.fao.org/docrep/004/y2795e/y2795e08a.htm|title=Fire prevention in radiation contaminated forests|last=Allard|first= Gillian|publisher=Forestry Department, [[Food and Agriculture Organization|FAO]]|access-date=2008-06-18}}</ref>

In 2010, [[2010 Russian wildfires|a series of wildfires]] affected contaminated areas, specifically the surroundings of [[Bryansk]] and border regions with Belarus and [[Ukraine]].<ref name="dw">{{cite web |url=http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,5890452,00.html |author=Deutsche Welle |title=Russian fires hit Chernobyl-affected areas, threatening recontamination |date=11 August 2010|author-link=Deutsche Welle }}</ref> The Russian government claimed that there was no discernible increase in radiation levels, while [[Greenpeace]] accused the government of denial.<ref name=dw/>

On 4 April 2020, [[2020 Chernobyl Exclusion Zone wildfires|a fire]] broke in the Zone on at least 20 hectares of Ukrainian forests. Approximately 90 firefighters were deployed to extinguish the blaze, as well as a helicopter and two aircraft. Radiation is still present in these forests, making firefighting more difficult; authorities stated that there was no danger to the surrounding population. The previous reported fire was in June 2018.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.dw.com/en/chernobyl-radioactive-forest-near-nuclear-plant-catches-fire/a-53019394|title=Chernobyl: Radioactive forest near nuclear plant catches fire {{pipe}} DW {{pipe}} 04.04.2020|website=DW.COM}}</ref>

===Current state of the ecosystem===
Despite the negative effect of the disaster on human life, many scientists see an overall beneficial effect to the [[ecosystem]]. Though the immediate effects of the accident were negative, the area quickly recovered and is today seen as very healthy. The lack of people in the area has increased the [[biodiversity]] of the Exclusion Zone in the years since the disaster.<ref name=":0">{{cite journal|last=Hopkin|first=Michael|date=9 August 2005|title=Chernobyl ecosystems 'remarkably healthy'|url=http://www.nature.com/news/2005/050808/full/news050808-4.html|journal=Nature News|pages=news050808–4|doi=10.1038/news050808-4|access-date=15 June 2017|via=www.Nature.com|url-access=subscription}}</ref>

In the aftermath of the disaster, radioactive contamination in the air had a decidedly negative effect on the fauna, vegetation, rivers, lakes, and groundwater of the area. The radiation resulted in deaths among coniferous plants, soil invertebrates, and mammals, as well as a decline in reproductive numbers among both plants and animals.<ref>WHO. (2005). Chernobyl: the true scale of the accident.</ref>

The surrounding forest was covered in radioactive particles, resulting in the death of 400 hectares of the most immediate pine trees, though radiation damage can be found in an area of tens of thousands of hectares.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://chornobyl.in.ua/en/red-forest-in-chernobyl-zone.html|title=Red forest: description of radioactive dead ecosystem {{!}} Чернобыль, Припять, зона отчуждения ЧАЭС|website=chornobyl.in.ua|language=en-US|access-date=2017-06-22|archive-date=31 May 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190531024454/http://chornobyl.in.ua/en/red-forest-in-chernobyl-zone.html|url-status=dead}}</ref> An additional concern is that as the dead trees in the Red Forest (named for the color of the dead pines) decay, contamination is leaking into the groundwater.<ref>{{Cite book|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=AKTjYeWO5E0C|title=Chernobyl - What Have We Learned?: The Successes and Failures to Mitigate Water Contamination Over 20 Years|last1=Onishi|first1=Yasuo|last2=Voitsekhovich|first2=Oleg V.|last3=Zheleznyak|first3=Mark J.|date=3 June 2007|publisher=Springer Science & Business Media|isbn=9781402053498|language=en|chapter=Chapter 2.6 - Radionucleotides in Groundwater in the CEZ}}</ref>

Despite all this, Professor Nick Beresford, an expert on Chernobyl and ecology, said that "the overall effect was positive" for the wildlife in the area.<ref name=":1">{{cite news|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/23/wildlife-returns-to-radioactive-wasteland-of-chernobyl/ |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220112/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/23/wildlife-returns-to-radioactive-wasteland-of-chernobyl/ |archive-date=12 January 2022 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live|title=30 years after Chernobyl disaster, wildlife is flourishing in radioactive wasteland|date=24 April 2016|newspaper=The Telegraph|access-date=8 January 2018|first=Roland|last=Oliphant|quote="You could say that the overall affect was positive," said Professor Nick Beresford, an expert on Chernobyl based at the centre for Ecology and hydrology in Lancaster.}}{{cbignore}}</ref>

The impact of radiation on individual animals has not been studied, but cameras in the area have captured evidence of a resurgence of the mammalian population – including rare animals such as the [[lynx]] and the vulnerable European bison.<ref name=":1" />

Research on the health of Chernobyl's wildlife is ongoing, and there is concern that the wildlife still suffers from some of the negative effects of the radiation exposure. Though it will be years before researchers collect the necessary data to fully understand the effects, for now, the area is essentially one of Europe's largest [[nature preserves]]. Overall, an assessment by [[Plant physiology|plant biochemist]] Stuart Thompson concluded, "the burden brought by radiation at Chernobyl is less severe than the benefits reaped from humans leaving the area." In fact, the ecosystem around the power plant "supports more life than before".