What percentage do endangered species make up of all animals?
82695
i am not sure, I am thinking about 25%
408752
Only 1% of all the species that have ever lived on Earth are still around.
51401
I think this question is too vague... Hunt what, where, with what, is the animal being hunted over populated, endangered.  Some people feel hunting is a horrible thing and the fact is that it can be a good thing for the survival of the species and the environment.
493684
Cloning has become a widely debated issue in the media since 1996, when a group of Scottish scientists led by Ian Wilmut cloned Dolly, a sheep that was the first clone of an adult mammal. The cloning process involves destroying the nucleus of an egg cell of the animal that will carry the clone and injecting a donor nucleus from the individual to be cloned into that egg cell. The resulting egg thus has a nucleus from the donor animal (which may be an endangered animal) and can develop into an animal that has the same genetic makeup as the donor, thus making the resulting offspring a clone.\n\nSince Dolly's appearance, a wide variety of uses for mammalian cloning have been proposed, including using cloned animals to produce superior livestock and to simplify the process of creating transgenic animals (genetically modified animals that can make human proteins in their milk, for example). Several groups have suggested cloning endangered or recently extinct species. A company called Advanced Cell Technology used a cow named Bessie to clone an Asian gaur, an endangered oxlike animal native to India and Burma (the cloned gaur died of an ordinary disease two days after his birth). Scientists also hope to move on to cloning extinct animals, perhaps starting with the cloning of the now-extinct bucardo mountain goat from Spain; scientists froze some tissue from the last living animal before the species became extinct.\n\nCloning endangered and extinct species has raised heated debate in the scientific community and beyond. On the one hand, many say it may offer us an opportunity to protect animals such as the giant panda from extinction so that our descendants will be able to see the beauty of these creatures. Some claim that cloning may help us bring back recently extinct species. Still others just want to have an opportunity to see a mammoth. (By the way, cloning mammoths from tissues frozen in Siberian permafrost is considered impossible with the current techniques because their DNA has become fragmented. In addition, scientists do not think that fossilized species such as dinosaurs can be cloned.) Indeed, if successful cloning of an endangered or recently extinct species is possible, we may be able to boost the populations of these animals.\n\nOn the other hand, cloned populations consist of genetically identical individuals, leading to high susceptibility to many diseases and slow adaptation to the environment. In addition, some argue that introducing extinct species back into the wild may upset the natural balance and have disastrous effects on the populations of other species. Such concerns are probably not as relevant with recently extinct species, where their extinction has usually been caused by human interventions, such as destruction of habitats and hunting. We do have to consider such issues when we start talking about bringing back mammoths, but the cloning of long-extinct species is still only a theoretical possibility. Concerns remain, however, that endangered and recently extinct species could be brought back to a world where their habitats no longer exist, and they will only be able to survive in zoos.\n\nAnother concern voiced by animal conservationists is that cloning endangered species would be viewed by the public (and governments) as an alternative to the breeding and habitat-protection programs already in place. Such possibilities are especially alarming as cloning techniques become cheaper and may be viewed as a less costly alternative to the more traditional means of protecting endangered species. Of course, cloning cannot serve as a substitute for such programs, because cloned animals lack the genetic diversity that is crucial to survival, and they still need habitats to live in.\n\nAs you can see, cloning is far from being able to serve as a Noah's Ark that would save all endangered species from extinction, but together with habitat protection and breeding programs, it may help some endangered and rece
718745
The percentage is between 99% and 95% depending on exactly what is being measured.\n\nAnd no, we shouldn't look more similar. Consider a human compared to a bacterium as being the 1% end of the scale. Based on that isn't a human 99% similar to a chimp?  If you listed all the features of human, a chimp and bacterium wouldn’t humans and chimps share 99% of those features? Humans and chimps are astoundingly similar when you consider the great diversity of life out there. The differences between the species are very superficial. Far less than the differences between a horse and donkey.\n\nThe reason you think there are large differences is simply species bias. You use your species as the standard by which you judge. You can’t do that. You need to use a third unrelated species as your standard. When you do that you will see that there really are less than 5% of traits different between humans and chimps.
1156179
"Diversity of Species" is one way nature protects itself from complete extinction.  In a complex environment, there are multiple paths to survival.  So species have evolved that suit each of these paths.  It only makes sense that species that are not a threat to one another would coexist in such a place.  It also makes senses that predators and prey would reach a natural balance (ie it only works if there are more gazelles than lions).  If a disease comes through that wipes out the gazelles, then the lions will all starve.  But life will go on because there are sloths and toads and ants and ballywoates (okay, I made that up) and fish and insects and so on....\n\nhope that helps.\n\nI'm just gald there's apparently a young person out there who still believes there is a diversity of species!
891130
Do you mean what % of genetic material (genes) are similar between the human and the ape?
941070
This is a nice question & if there was a more intelligent & powerful species then V wuld either b extinct or endangered bcoz as 2day v r dh most intelligient species but our actions hav endangered the survival of many animals & birds
904769
When the teacher finds 15 out of 100 tagged giraffes, it indicates that 15% of the population have been tagged. Therefore, to find the whole population, divide the number of tagged giraffes by the proportion of tagged giraffes (divide 60 by 15%). The answer is 400 giraffes.
49956
one species of animal is defined as a group of organisms that may breed to produce viable offspring. eg. "Mammals" are not a "species" as they are not all able to interbreed (never seen a rabbit-sheep cross, have you?) I would estimate at over 1000 "animals" although there must be many more species of organism, including many species of insects, plants, bacteria, fungi, viruses etc.\n\nLook up the science of "phylogenetics" or phylogeny for more details
1127928
Most people and animals are creatures of habit.
426341
The World Conservation Union (IUCN) has a number of criteria they use to determine what level of threat to assess for a species.\n\nThere are nine categories they put species into:  Extinct, Extinct in the Wild, Critically Endangered, Endangered, Vulnerable, Near Threatened, Least Concern, Data Deficient, and Not Evaluated.\n\nSpecies threatened with extinction (Vulnerable, Endangered and Critically Endangered) are based on qualitative criteria around their rate of decline, population size, area of geographic distribution, and degree of fragmentation in population or distribution.
201240
Well, every animal has it's own set of stats.  I suggest you google a bit.
1087763
to keep species of plants and animals from going extinct and to educatethe public
614752
I don't really think they're essential to the global eco-system. If you could magically turn all deserts into plains or something, there are certain animals that you would drive to extinction, but I don't think the Earth would suffer because of it..... BUT humans would then populate vast areas (like the Sahara) that were previously uninhabitable, and pollute the Earth even more... so if you look at it that way, they're important because they limit human expansion.
381471
They are all taken! or do they even exist anymore?....they are an endagered species!! lol
921547
Zoos protect endangered species, provide medical attention to animals, and keep the safe from their predators and man.