Study Finds Humans Are Worse Than Radiation For Chernobyl Animals

derekmead writes: A study published today in Current Biology shows that wildlife in the Chernobyl exclusion zone is actually more abundant than it was before the disaster. According to the authors, led by Portsmouth University professor of environmental science Jim Smith, the recovery is due to the removal of the single biggest pressure on wildlife—humans. "The wildlife at Chernobyl is very likely better than it was before the accident, not because radiation is good for animals, but because human occupation is much worse,” Portsmouth University professor of environmental science Jim Smith says. “We were trying to emphasize that this study is a remarkable illustration of an obvious, but important message,” he said. “It is ordinary human habitation and use (farming, forestry, hunting) of land which does most ecological damage.”

Comments

Save the rainforest

[MouseR]

With just a couple of nukes!

Re:Save the rainforest

[Tablizer]

Space critters: "Humanize it from orbit just to make sure."

Lead by example

[tompaulco]

Words are just words. If you think humans are overcrowded and are killing off the wildlife, then set a good example and make that ultimate sacrifice for nature. Perhaps others will follow your example.