> "Many people come here expecting to see a lunar landscape, so when they see trees, and birds and a few mammals, they're surprised.
> "They think, 'ah well maybe it's not so bad'.
> "But what we're finding is that there is a significant impact on both the population and the biodiversity - the number of species - in the zone. And it's directly proportional to the level of contamination."
(But the article mentions that this is a polarised debate, and that this is only one side.)
"Not scientifically justified".
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/6946210.stm)
> But scientists who assessed the 1986 disaster's impact on birds said the ecological effects were "considerably greater than previously assumed".
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/14250489)
> "Many people come here expecting to see a lunar landscape, so when they see trees, and birds and a few mammals, they're surprised.
> "They think, 'ah well maybe it's not so bad'.
> "But what we're finding is that there is a significant impact on both the population and the biodiversity - the number of species - in the zone. And it's directly proportional to the level of contamination."
(But the article mentions that this is a polarised debate, and that this is only one side.)
Chernobyl Birds are Small Brained
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_9387000/938...)
Insects in decline
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7949314.stm)