> That the Chernobyl exclusion zone has become an animal sanctuary is held out as an example of ability of ecosystems to tolerate low-level radioactivity. I'm

> That the Chernobyl exclusion zone has become an animal sanctuary is held out as an example of ability of ecosystems to tolerate low-level radioactivity. I'm not sure what's the meaning of that statement. Chernobyl might have become an animal sanctuary, but it is also showcases a massive drop in abundance of some species, and a ‘severely depressed’ leaf litter decomposition. The life expectancy of stray dogs in chernobyl is lower than 5-6 years. So Chernobyl is an animal sanctuary and wildlife haven, but it's not in the coloquial sense. Human intervention is almost non existent, but the few species that manage to survive are enduring negative consequences, and it just so happens that their reproduction rate is high enough to ensure replacing.