There is probably truth to some of the sightings.

Firstly, there is an extensive discussion (some 12 pages or so) on the debate about whether the thylacine is extinct or not, at the Online Thylacine Museum (see).

To summarise one key point from that discussion, recent mathematical modeling makes it most likely the thylacine persistent into the 1940s at least. This conclusion is based on studying the declining numbers of thylacines during the 1900s as measured by newspaper accounts and similar, by Sleightholme and Campbell. Earlier research by Guiler was based on bounty payments but Sleightholme and Campbell argue this wasn’t the best source of data (for their research on breeding schedules) because there would be a delay between kill and presentation for the bounty.

While there are numerous public accounts documented for sightings of the thylacine, you can probably read about most of these yourself. Key names to research are Hans Naarding, a park ranger who had his sighting in the 1980s in Tasmania which launched a 2 year search by the government, and Kevin Cameron who produced ambiguous photographs of an animal - seemingly a juvenile thylacine - from Western Australia, also in the 1980s.

Following this, perhaps the most intriguing account is of a thylacine accidentally shot dead in Tasmania in 1990, per the account of Col Bailey in his book Shadow of the Thylacine. The book was published in 2013 and soon after the Thylacine Research Unit (TRU) published a video interview with a man named Rusty who confirmed he took photos of the carcass but that it was a dead animal found in its den (ie. not shot). In this account we have a published colour photograph of the animal’s foot - confirming the species ID - and allegations of further photographs taken, but not published.

It is not concrete proof. There is also debate about whether the animal was shot or found deceased but perhaps more importantly, there is no debate about the “fact” (unproved) that there was a freshly dead thylacine in 1990.

If this claim can be proved it would mean that between 1936 and 1990 - some 54 years - there was no verifiable evidence of the thylacine’s persistence. Yet, if proved, there it is - a top-order ground based predator which can grow to the size of a leopard, getting by for over half a century without us humans being able to prove ie.

From 1990 to 2017 is merely some 27 years since - barely half that time. Could the thylacine have made it that far again without concrete proof? If 1990 is accepted, then 2017 is entirely feasible - with one caveat: A *lot* of Tasmania’s forests have been cleared in recent decades and the logging pressure persists. If the thylacine made it to 1990 because of sufficient forest habitat, then the logging pressure may finally push it to extinction. There is an argument made that “if they’ve made it to today in spite of our environmental resource harvesting activities, then they should be fine without much intervention” - but I feel it is naive to think you can endlessly harvest and modify the landscape without the likelihood of losing top order predators. As John Gould wrote in 1863:

“When the comparatively small island of Tasmania becomes more densely populated, and its primitive forests are intersected with roads from the eastern to the western coast, the numbers of this singular animal will speedily diminish, extermination will have its full sway, and it will then, like the Wolf in England and Scotland, be recorded as an animal of the past...” (Gould, 1863).

Find out more about Tasmanian tigers - including the examination of the evidence for many sighting claims - at my website Where Light Meets Dark or follow along on Facebook Where Light Meets Dark.