Our Seed & Spark campaign was successful!

If you'd still like to contribute, it's not too late. Head over to the film fund page on our fiscal sponsor's website to mkae a tax-deductible contribution that will go straight toward film costs! 

----

What exactly is a "good wolf"?  That depends on who you ask. A century ago, many Americans would have echoed a common government bounty slogan, "A good wolf is a dead wolf." But times have changed. Now, if you are a wildlife activist, a good wolf is probably a wild one, free to live its life unhindered by human interference. For a hunter or fur trapper in rural Alaska, the answer might have more to do with providing sustenance and livelihood for you and your family. To a scientist, good wolves might be the ones that provide useful data. If you are a visitor to Denali National Park, a good wolf might be the one that crosses the road in front of your tour bus for a photo opportunity. 

For me, A Good Wolf is a feature-length documentary that explores these diverging viewpoints within the context of the lengthy, emotionally charged, and continuing battle over how wolves (and bears) are managed at the boundary of Denali National Park. 

But this film is about much more than wolves. It's about the complexities and difficulties of balancing competing human interests on public lands. It explores opposing ideas about wild predators' place among humans, and what (if any) responsibility we might have to manage them within natural ecosystems. And it illuminates fundamental differences in how people determine the value of wildlife, wilderness, and National Parks.

A Good Wolf  [working title] will follow the activities of three primary characters over the course of the next year: a wildlife activist, a local hunter/trapper, and a Denali National Park biologist. Their stories and work will give viewers a compelling glimpse into the various ways residents relate to animals and eachother in this isolated and often harsh landscape. Through these interwoven narratives, and with the help of additional expert interviews, we will be able to better understand the historical and contemporary issues at play, including political, regulatory, scientific, and cultural influences.

Above: a collared wolf crosses the road in Denali National Park 

WHY DOES THIS MATTER?

Denali National Park is said to be the historical epicenter of wolf controversy in America, which runs deep and wide. Transboundary wildlife issues are almost ubiquitous in National Parks across the country and have recently come to the forefront in places like Yellowstone, where reintroduced wolves are simultaneously lauded by environmentalists for their perceived positive ecological impacts, and intentionally targeted by hunters and ranchers at the park boundary. As the gray wolf faces federal delisting from the Endangered Species Act, the debate over its place among humans is rekindled. To unpack the deeper themes at play in this controversy, we can return to the unabated conflict at its epicenter.

Above: a wolf travels along the road in Denali National Park

THE CONTROVERSY (in a nutshell): 

This issue is pretty complicated (which is why filmmaking is the perfect medium to tease out its nuances), but here is a very brief summary:

McKinley National Park was designated in 1917 as a 2-million-acre refuge for Dall sheep, largely at the behest of hunters who wanted to protect their favorite game species. It was also the only National Park that did not exterminate wolves or other predators from its land holdings in the ensuing decades, and official scientific study of the park's wolves began in the 1930s. When the park was renamed Denali and expanded to 6.4 million acres in 1980, an intruding 25-mile peninsula of land (Wolf Townships) near the town of Healy was left under state management, exposing wildlife to legal hunting and trapping pressure as they cross the invisible park boundary. 

After the Alaskan “wolf wars” of the 1990s and strenuous advocacy from both wildlife activists and controversial biologist Gordon Haber, the Alaska Board of Game (which determines almost all state wildlife management policies) enacted a moratorium on wolf hunting and trapping in some parts of the Wolf Townships in 2000. In 2010, however, when the National Parks Service sought an expansion, the Board instead decided to rescind the entire protected area. Over the past decade, several of the most visible and longest-studied wolf packs in Denali have been greatly diminished or even eliminated entirely, which many activists attribute partly to trapping activity in the Wolf Townships. To complicate matters further, in 2014, the Alaska Board of Game approved “baiting” for grizzly bears in this area, allowing hunters to effectively lure wildlife out of the park. In 2016, the alpha female wolf of a well-known and long-studied pack was shot at a bear bait station in the Wolf Townships and her GPS collar illegally destroyed. The pack collapsed as several other members were killed, demoralizing wildlife activists and inflaming division among local residents.

Wildlife advocates and many biologists have long maintained that this area, which serves as vital winter habitat for both the Denali caribou herd and the animals which rely on it for prey, was always intended to be included in the expansion and should be a designated protected area to provide a contiguous habitat zone for the animals who primarily inhabit park lands. Trappers and some hunters vehemently oppose such restrictions, however, as this area is widely known to provide some of the best fur trapping in the region--especially for wolf pelts. These groups argue that the park was designed to protect sheep (not predators), and that 6.4 million acres of restricted land should be enough. Furthermore, they point out that wolves and bears are not endangered in Alaska, maintaining healthy populations both regionally and statewide with legal harvest seasons, and that new packs and individuals quickly replace those taken by hunters and trappers. 

Above: a local trapper shows us the most popular leg-hold trap used for wolves.

CURRENT STATUS OF PROJECT:

We completed a two-week pre-production trip in May 2019 to begin shooting initial footage, build relationships, and conduct interviews. These first interviews included our main characters as well as local politicians, historians, tourism operators, and additional scientists, trappers, and activists. We raised enough money to cover our expenses for that trip entirely from the incredible generosity of the local community, holding public events in Anchorage, Healy (near Denali), and Fairbanks. With the knowledge and footage collected during that time, I have applied to a variety of film grants, fellowships, and pitch sessions to help raise additional funds for future production trips, post-production, and distribution. I am committed to getting this film made, and have kept my overhead costs low in order to get as far as I have so far. But it's time for the next stage.

I won't hear anything about pending grant applications for months, and we need to return to film with our characters and experts before it starts snowing! That's where you come in.

$14,500 will give me the remaining funds I need for the next production trip in September, including travel expenses, equipment, permits, and insurance. 

Above: wolf biologist Dr. Bridget Borg sets up a trail camera at a wolf den site.

AUDIENCE, IMPACT AND DISTRIBUTION:

This film is intended to bridge divides, and to appeal to a broad audience both in Alaska and across the U.S. I have worked hard to build trust with a variety of stakeholders, including wildlife activists, hunters and trappers, tourism operators, National Parks staff, and local residents. I take this trust, and representational ethics, very seriously; I do not intend to further entrench conflict or villainize individuals, but to portray actions, worldviews, and concerns with fairness and compassion. I believe this approach can serve to highlight the historical, regulatory, cultural, and political elements that have perpetuated this conflict without causing harm to individual people who participate in the film. I also believe this approach will hold the most impact potential to spur constructive public discourse and engagement that recognizes legitimate concerns from many angles, deescalates tensions, redirects criticism, dispels misinformation, and perhaps provides new avenues for collaborative/cooperative solutions. I plan for the film to screen at traditional film festival venues, and I am additionally working with organizational partners like Alaska Wildlife Alliance to schedule community screenings across Alaska, providing access to the film for underserved communities.

PROJECTED TIMELINE:

September 2019: First production shoot on-location.

October 2019 - February 2020: Seeking significant grant funding with work-in-progress sample, planning for second production shoot.

Feb/March 2020: Second production shoot on-location.

May/June 2020: Final production shoot on-location.

June-December 2020: Post-production.

January 2021: Release date.

WHAT IF WE DON'T GET ENOUGH FUNDING TO COMPLETE THE FEATURE FILM?

We've planned for contingency. Along with the broad range of interviews and field footage I already filmed during pre-production, on this next trip we'll collect at least enough additonal material to complete a short film (15-30 minutes), ensuring that your contribution will go toward a finished product.