The study identifies that a threat is there and will persist. The conclusion is that the study was done where human/wolf encounters and interactions is limited due to the vast area and diminished population densities involved, and therefore that the likelihood of confrontations will exacerbate as population densities increase.

Given that this study positively identifies a real risk, and that such risk is proportional to the incidence of encounter, I would have to say that as wolf populations in the lower 48 increase, there will be an increase in the number of attacks on humans, and by inference more attacks on pets and livestock. Will this be acceptable? It depends on the rate of increase of incidents and their perceived severity I reckon.