The Adamsfield Thylacine evidence, in my opinion, is comprehensive and demonstrates that the Tasmanian Tiger survived until 1990 (at least), in Tasmania.
The history of this event is complex and detailed, but in essence, the basic story is that a Tasmanian Tiger was shot dead near Adamsfield in 1990. One or more photographs were taken of the body but the persons involved wished to keep the incident completely confidential. Somehow though, one photograph - of the animal's foot - did leak. Some person (or persons) unknown then took this leaked photograph to Museum Victoria and a comparison was made between the foot depicted in that photograph, and an authentic Tasmanian Tiger skin (which had its feet intact). At least two photos were then taken of this comparison. One of those photos shows only the forefeet of the taxidermy, but the other photo shows one of the taxidermy's feet lying on top of that original photograph of the dead Adamsfield tiger's foot.
As such, the evidence for this case then reduces to two things:
- Does the photograph show the foot of a Tasmanian Tiger, to the exclusion of all other candidate species?
- And if so, can we be certain of the provenance of the photograph and the back story - that indeed this relates to an animal shot near Adamsfield in 1990?
It is my opinion that the features shown in the photograph categorically demonstrate the animal to be Thylacine, to the exclusion of all other candidate species in Tasmania. That is, I believe criterion 1 is satisfied.
It is my belief that the photograph does relate to the story as it was first recounted - that it relates to a Tasmanian Tiger shot near Adamsfield in 1990. For this second criterion, however, some readers might feel the evidence is circumstantial and not comprehensively proved beyond reasonable doubt. I can accept that conclusion and only re-iterate that it is my belief that the story is true - and that belief is based on many things, including first hand discussions with the alleged shooter, Stan "Rusty" Morley, conversations with Thylacine researcher and book author Col Bailey - who first broke the story publicly and conversations with Adrian "Richo" Richardson - who may now be better known for his involvement with Greg Booth's alleged sighting and trail camera captures, but who was, in the 1990s, partnered up with Col Bailey in the search for the Thylacine and who was also heavily involved first-hand in investigating the case of the Adamsfield Thylacine, both together with Col and independently.
On top of the conversations I have had with these people, the circumstances of the case itself increase my conviction that it is authentic.
This page is, however, only an overview of the case. Use the site navigation to read the child pages, but note: the very first article was written at a time where everyone was mistaken about the interpretation of the photographs that we have available. For two decades it was stated and believed that the two photos we have available were photographs of the feet of the Adamsfield thylacine itself, but they were not! My second article is where I show conclusively that the main subject matter of those two photographs is in fact a museum taxidermy kept at Museum Victoria, but - and this is a crucial "but" - the reality is that that taxidermy was placed on top of one actual photograph of the actual Adamsfield thylacine's foot. I do not know how or why that detail was missed for two decades. I only know that this is the clear and correct interpretation of these photographs now ... and that all things considered, I am satisfied the Adamsfield evidence demonstrates that the Tasmanian Tiger made it to 1990 in Tasmania.