Alan:
This discussion has surfaced off and on in various forums are 'arenas' including the PARC (Partnership in Amphibian and Reptile Conservation) web site.
It is my present thoughts that there are two different approaches often take by both sides. One is the philosophical position that removing any organism from the wild in wrong and immoral. Trying to argue against such a position is like trying to change the basic philosophy of a Republican or Democrat--can't (or rarely) can be done.
The other position is from a biological perspective with a number of individuals (that I consider as ill-informed in the basics of population biology) taking the position that we need to know more about this or that species before any take is warranted. The pros and cons of such a position is far more open to debate in my estimation from that standpoint of applying basic biological principles, logic, and common sense.
Richard F. Hoyer