It is because 'modern man' doesn't understand what a 'modern wilderness' is (yes its the wrong word, but I can't think of another at this moment). Your argument would not be correct if the land was true wilderness, i.e. self sustaining with little encroachment by man except perhaps some limited subsistence hunting. In that case, the ecosystem would theoretically be in a balance with sufficient ungulates to support a finite number of wolves (if not, either ungulates or wolves would be extinct). As you have pointed out innumerable times, that is no longer the case and 'wilderness' is actually now forest/ranch/farmland.... despite what we might perhaps imagine. The problem is that we all demand different things from the 'wilderness' - ranchers want grazing, foresters want timber, ramblers want freedom to walk and camp, hunters want a good population of game, armchair conservationists want wolves to live in wilderness and people to live in towns so there would be no conflict because we'd buy our meat at the supermarket!