I get the points Will is making, but I also understand the sentiment that this experiment was unnecessary.
Why do we need to know how long desert torts of various ages can survive without water? What's the point? Don't we already know that they do better with good hydration and that larger torts (larger than the yearlings in this study), due to body mass alone, can survive a lot longer with no water? If head starting an endangered species is the goal, why do we need to learn the extremes of what they can just barely survive? Shouldn't they be studying optimal head starting methods and then studying the results after release?
I'm not understanding what the value of knowing how long it takes them to die without water is? We already know its not good for them and at some point they'll expire. Why do we need to actually let a bunch of them die for something we already know? I don't need to watch small tortoises die of dehydration to know that they are going to die of dehydration.
Why do we need to know how long desert torts of various ages can survive without water? What's the point? Don't we already know that they do better with good hydration and that larger torts (larger than the yearlings in this study), due to body mass alone, can survive a lot longer with no water? If head starting an endangered species is the goal, why do we need to learn the extremes of what they can just barely survive? Shouldn't they be studying optimal head starting methods and then studying the results after release?
I'm not understanding what the value of knowing how long it takes them to die without water is? We already know its not good for them and at some point they'll expire. Why do we need to actually let a bunch of them die for something we already know? I don't need to watch small tortoises die of dehydration to know that they are going to die of dehydration.