Darren,
Just so we're clear, my post wasn't directed at you personally. I figured you were posting the link to start a conversation.
I'm no expert but I do know that wolves have been a largely undisturbed component of the predator/prey relationship in just about every region of the state. There are so many variables that impact herd dynamics. Most go unnoticed by the public because they are subtle and require scientific study. Good or bad, wolves draw attention wherever they're found which tends to push their impact on various herds to the forefront. Wolves seem to get a disproportionate amount of press.
From what I 've read the effects of wolf predation tend to be very localized, often limited to a particular drainage or plateau or mountain range etc. Wolves also typically have a notional impact on ungulate numbers during periods of relative normalcy for the habitat or region in question. Meaning to say, as long as herd strength has not been lessened to the point of concern by some other factors such as extreme weather, disease, loss of forage etc., then wolves tend to keep herd numbers in check like they're supposed to. However if a particular population has been made vulnerable, wolves can, and have taken a sudden and devastating toll.
Moose can be particularly vulnerable to this type of opportunistic predation. We sometimes get "Chinook Winds" during mid-winter(warm winds out of the south) which puts a hard crust on the snow after things turn cold again. Moose break through this crust and if the snow underneath is at all deep, they have to lunge in order to move whenever they're not on hardpacked trails. They quickly become exhausted under these conditions. The wolves of course can run on top of the crust and few moose caught in these conditions survive.
That, anyway, is my take as far as I know about how things usually play out here in AK. Wolf reintroduction in the Rockies still has to overcome public perception driven by two centuries worth of cultural programming that wolves are bad.