It is something that needs saying and probably repeating at frequent intervals too as it raises the issue of whether there should be no-go areas for humans. This in turn might be problematic in areas where the economic value of large carnivores is defined by the truckloads of tourists chasing them.
It's not so much human presence as intense development that affects wildlife. Backcountry hikers, hunters, fishermen, and campers have limited impact on predator and prey symbiosis. If anything the large predators will view you as prey. I've been circled by coyotes, wolves and black bears while doing these things. As have most people who partake in these activities. The only ones that worry me are bears. Unpredictable buggers they are.
The truly destructive thing is roads and habitat pressure due to proximity of urban environments (noise, smells, food sources) that alter daily pattern. Large prey (deer, etc...) are creatures of habit driven by day/night patterns, wind, and their belief that everyone is out to get them. Seems to me They would be much more likely to alter their routine due to human pressure but the paper doesn't speak to that (if it does I missed it). And where the food goes, the predators go.
This is just my experience gained from being an avid outdoorsman for many years.
