Why the name "Tigerman"?

100 years ago the name “tiger man” or “tigerman” was given to people who hunted and killed the thylacine for bounty payments - and they were one of the main reasons it was nearly wiped out. I chose the name "tigerman" to take that filthy part of the animal's history and reclaim it in an effort to save the species.

Does the thylacine still exist?

We cannot say it exists because we currently do not have proof of that. However there is plenty of sub-proof evidence and scientific opinion to suggest that it does. In other words there is a very real chance that we still have time to save the Tasmanian tiger. I sighted two different individuals in 2002, so logic says it should still be there. We know the thylacine did exist to recent times, and there is no proof it is extinct. There are plenty of reasons why it could still exist, but not one reason why it can’t. The most extensive and authoritative scientific study by far (2023) concluded there is “A SMALL CHANCE OF PERSISTENCE IN THE REMOTE SOUTH-WESTERN WILDERNESS AREAS.” However small the chance may be, that is not “extinct since 1936”. In fact it is a fantastic and uplifting good news story - that it may not be too late to save this animal! Don’t listen to some 30 second facebook opinion, or a scientist telling you it is extinct without ever having set foot in the bush to look for it. Don’t listen to a Tasmanian government representative saying we might as well all give up on the species, when the government has had a clear economic conflict of interest.

What about scientific experts who claim the species is extinct?

Who are these people? Various so-called experts have claimed the thylacine is extinct over the years. One group used a flawed computer model to claim there was a 1 in 1.6 trillion chance of it still existing. Most if not all of these people have made arrogant and damaging claims, without ever having set foot in the Tasmanian bush to search for the thylacine. Plenty of self-appointed experts post on-line opinions it is extinct, but I wonder if they’ve thought about the subject for more than 5 minutes. Sorry for the negativity, but I’ve seen the extinction myth grow to become “fact”, when people who make that damaging claim actually have no idea. It is somewhat infuriating when a giant like Col Bailey spends 20 years defending the thylacine despite all the nay-sayers, having seen it himself (which opens the all-important door to recovering the species). Then some nobody says it is extinct and tells him what he did or didn’t see. A cheap on-line opinion seems to carry the same weight as advice from an advocate who has spent years in the field. Claiming the species to be extinct makes it harder for anybody trying to help the Tasmanian tiger, and pushes us all to give up on it. Virtually every scientist who has actually conducted a physical search, agrees there is a reasonable and logical chance it could still be there.

If the thylacine does still exist, then how many are there, and why not leave it alone to breed in peace?

“Leave it alone to breed in peace” is a lazy, unscientific argument. The thylacine species obviously has not been able to recover by itself, and every analysis suggests it is either extinct or slipping away. There cannot be more than 100 thylacines remaining. If there were only 100 koalas left in the wild, nobody would say leave them alone to breed in peace! A recovery program would be implemented now for the thylacine, as for any other critically endangered animal, however Australian society will not protect an animal it thinks is extinct. The first step to saving it is for somebody to prove the species still exists - eg. see this link.

If the thylacine still exists, then where does it live?

Most likely in the SW quarter of Tasmania. The eastern half of the island appears too disturbed. The NW quarter is disturbed by human activity, logging and mining - it appears that individuals occasionally move up there from the SW, but they encounter disturbance and quickly return.

As for it being in New Guinea or the mainland of Australia, they are both worth investigating, but I personally have only had the energy to think about Tasmania.

Did it live solitary or in groups?

It appears this species was generally solitary, but males may have kept a territory in the vicinity of females, or closer to them during mating periods. Mothers and young were sometimes seen together.

What kind of sounds did it make?

It was silent most of the time, but made a coughing noise when alarmed, or a terrier-like yipping noise when hunting. It was apparently able to make a very loud call like a whinnying horse.

How can you say the adult you sighted was seven feet long?

I say it was “about seven feet long”. I don’t know how long it was because I didn’t measure it. The point is it was a big animal. At the time I was able to scale it against a nearby roadside guide post, and it appeared to be 3/4 as high as the post. I later measured that post, and estimated the animal to be 600mm high at the shoulders. From a distance it appeared the same size as a panther, and it walked in a similar manner, but also distinctly different.

You say the ones you sighted were dark brown, but that is not the thylacine coat colour.

Yes, and that tormented me for 15 years. However recent analysis of sighting reports shows that since the 1980’s, around 75% of sightings describe a “thylacine” which was dark brown, with the stripes not necessarily visible. It could be that there was a darker colour form living in the deep SW. The lighter forms died out, so what we are seeing now are darker coloured thylacines which occasionally walk out of the SW.

How can you say that there are places in Tasmania where no human has ever walked before?

From what I’ve seen there are plenty of places in Tasmania where IT IS LIKELY no human has ever walked before. We can't say that for sure of course, given aborigines have lived on the island for thousands of years. However it is true that many parts of the interior south west are extremely thick and inhospitable. Nobody has had a logical reason to push into those places, and so it is likely that nobody ever has gone there. Declaring the thylacine extinct is premature without investigating all of these areas. A lot of work has recently been done, but not enough to declare the species extinct.

What about all the extensive searches that have been carried out in the past?

The public view seems to be that extensive searches by authorities were unable to find the thylacine in the past, so it must now be extinct. The Tasmanian government is a benevolent protector of wildlife of course, so it would have done all that can be done. In fact when reading the history we see that most of the so-called extensive searches were woefully insufficient. Some were little more than a three-week publicity stunt. One of the benchmark “extensive” camera searches in the 1980’s found the thylacine to be extinct - when in fact they only used three cameras, only obtained a few hundred photos, and did not obtain any photos of wombats or Bennetts wallabies. On that basis wombats are also extinct.

More extensive searches have been conducted over the past 20 years, but still not enough to declare the species extinct.

Has thylacine information been supressed?

Yes. The Tasmanian government has always considered wildlife and wilderness as a resource like any other. That is why the Parks and Wildlife Service has been placed in the same department as logging and mining, under the same Minister. The role of the PWS is to manage this otherwise worthless resource for the benefit of the State – so it doesn’t interfere with the other more lucrative resource industries. The government owns wildlife, so will manage it as seen fit. Secrecy is used where required, as with every other arm of government. The thylacine is a unique case, because this species has the potential to bring down the government and turn the economy of Tasmania inside-out. Boy’s clubs at the top of government and PWS act first in the interest of the State, and second in their own interest. There is no government function to help recover the thylacine, in fact rediscovery is dreaded by those who would need to deal with it.

The end result of all of this is an on-going process of suppression of thylacine information. Sighting reports are hoarded and kept from the public, uncontrolled private searchers have been discouraged or blocked, and the media has been manipulated so that we all believe it is too late to help this animal. There are no criminals and no conspiracy as such, just an inevitable process of ridding the economy of an element which never fitted in.

Is there a secret Tasmanian government/Parks & Wildlife thylacine file?

Yes. Since the early 1980’s the Tasmanian government has been collecting formal thylacine sighting reports and other relevant information, and holding it in a “Thylacine file” which is not publicly available. Several attempts have been made by private individuals to access it over the years, but they have been quickly fobbed off. The file contains hundreds of documents, which could and should have been used to help recover the species.

You criticise the government for keeping secrets, but you keep secrets yourself.

I have kept secrets in a fight to save the species, but in my view the Tasmanian government has been keeping secrets to smother it.

Are there serious contradictions in the government/PWS approach to the thylacine?

Yes… The thylacine is extinct, but it is necessary to keep information secret to “protect” it. We are sitting on hundreds of files, but we have no evidence the thylacine still exists. Hundreds of non-random sightings corroborate each other, but they are all wrong. It is important that we alone continue to receive sighting reports, but we won’t do anything to help the species. We are working hard to protect the thylacine, only where it might benefit us or the State. Thylacine is extinct, but it is illegal to try and catch one in order to prove the species exists. Anybody can freely look for whatever they want, but you need a “permit” from us to look for the thylacine. We don’t want private searchers disturbing the bush, but we will log half of it, and gather revenue from permits for 1080 poison and shooting native wildlife. Irresponsible searchers are an unacceptable danger to the thylacine, and the government owned logging industry poses no threat at all. We welcome private searches, so long as they’ve got no chance of success. All a private searcher needs to do is ask for information, but we’ll never give out anything useful. We encourage private searchers, and have outsourced our effort to them, but will not provide any assistance whatsoever. We will fine “irresponsible” searchers and frown upon the possible killing a thylacine, but waive all that if we have total control of the body. If the thylacine still exists, then that proves wholesale logging is not so bad after all. If the thylacine still exists, then this is all due to the untiring protective efforts of the Fauna Board/PWS. The Parks and Wildlife service is a professional organisation in complete control, and we are struggling to keep the lid on an increasingly monumental can of worms.

What is this term "functionally extinct"?

The term “functionally extinct” has been used by government representatives to describe status of the thylacine. In my view this is an effort to strengthen the public illusion that the thylacine is extinct (tag it with the word “extinct”) - when in fact there is no way to prove it is extinct. The concept is that if the thylacine is “functionally extinct” (no longer performing its ecological role, and unlikely to recover by itself), then we might as well all give up on it whether it still exists or not.

Why did you think the logging industry would try to stop you?

It is not so much that without anonymity I might have been “stopped”, but more that my work might be interfered with to the point where it becomes untenable or a danger to the thylacine species. The more people knew what I was doing, the more chance there was that somebody might interfere. I lost a lot of cameras to theft over the years, with most stolen by the PWS. Several appeared to be intentionally bulldozed by Forestry Tasmania or managers of a nearby Mine operation - as though to send a message of some kind. I certainly felt like a mouse scurrying under the feet of giants. I worked in various areas of public land without “permission”, so we could say I brought it upon myself. But imagine the absurdity of asking for “permission” to search for the thylacine, from organisations which would stand to lose the most.

Are conditions in place for a true conspiracy of secrecy?

Yes. We don’t know what has been said about the thylacine in back rooms or hallways of government, but there is potential for a major cover-up. For example my understanding is that for a long period there was one PWS man appointed by the government to handle all thylacine matters – who kept his information secret - Nick Mooney. The relevant Minister for a time David Llewellyn was answerable to deputy Premier (soon to be Premier) Paul Lennon. Paul Lennon was also “Minster for forests”, and David Llewellyn had held that position in the past. David Llewellyn had previously appointed Paul Lennon as “Deputy Chair of Forest and Forest Industry Council.” Lennon and Llewellyn were both members of the “Forest Protection Society”, which protects the logging industry’s right to access forests. Paul Lennon had been accused of pushing David Llewellyn to act corruptly in the interest of the logging industry in the past. Both were determined to avoid triggers which might prompt the Federal government to intervene in Tasmanian affairs as it had in the Franklin Dam dispute. Paul Lennon would later become Premier of Tasmania, with Llewellyn as Deputy Premier. Nick Mooney was answerable directly to the Parks & Wildlife Service General Manager. The PWS General Manager was answerable directly to David Llewellyn, and guess who the PWS General Manager has been… Nick Mooney’s brother.

So there has been a chain of only two people between Premier of the State (a logging man), and the agent appointed to handle all thylacine matters. All it would take is one off-the-record directive, for existence of a magnificent species to be covered up. It seems naïve to assume that didn’t happen many times over the past 100 years.

In the 1960’s the Premier of Tasmania made this comment: “Live tiger no use. Most people would be sorry if a Tasmanian tiger was found and captured, the Premier (Mr Reece) said yesterday. And from a publicity point of view, he said, Tasmania probably would score more notoriety from the tiger if it was extinct, and joins such departed species as dinosaurs, moa birds, and kiwis.”

We might think the government attitude has changed since then, but from what I’ve seen, Tasmanian politicians today are only a lot more careful with what they say. A politician’s job is to act in the interest of the people of Tasmania, not defend a marsupial, and certainly not one which threatens to overturn the economy. Tasmania struggles to pay for hospitals and schools as it is, so it cannot afford lost revenue from the logging and mining industries.

How can you say the Tasmanian government has never done anything to help the thylacine, when it has been officially protected since 1936?

Public opinion is manipulated by playing with words. The only reason why the thylacine was “protected” in 1936 is because the Tasmanian Museum was not able to obtain specimens for trade overseas, and wanted to prevent private individuals from killing it, so they could kill it themselves. Sounds ridiculous? Notes from the time…

“At a meeting of the Tasmanian Advisory Committee held this morning, it was resolved to ask you to give consideration to the question of placing the Tasmanian marsupial wolf (Thylacinus cynocephalus) on the totally protected list. The reason for the committee’s action is that these animals are now becoming very rare. Prices paid by mainland and other institutions make it almost impossible for Tasmanian Museums and zoos to secure specimens. Should the animals be placed on the totally protected list and application be made to destroy same on any area, the permit could be granted by the Department, provided the animal when caught, be sold to the Department at a fixed price; the Department could then sell it at a profit to the National institutions. As practically all Thylacines are now on crown land, the above suggestion merely means that Tasmania would retain its own possessions. In regard to prices, Beaumaris zoo will give £20 for a live Thylacinus cynocephalus, and the Tasmanian Museum will give £10 for a dead one provided same is in good condition.”

“One of the chief factors which caused the Advisory Committee to take action was the fact that an agent on the North West Coast has lately been making endeavours to secure specimens of these animals for export outside the state, where very high prices are given for Tasmanian Marsupial Wolves. This gentleman has stated that Tasmanian Institutions have little hope of securing examples from him, as they cannot offer to pay the prices he can obtain elsewhere... Should the wolf be placed on the protected list, as it is hoped it will, and it is found to be doing any damage in any district, any sufferer could obtain a special permit; but a better system would be for an official party to proceed to that district and secure any animals that are doing damage... the Beaumaris Zoo and the Tasmanian Museum would be pleased undertake the matter of collecting the Thylacines in any district where they are reported to be doing damage, as in the last few years neither of the above institutions have been able to obtain specimens.”

“The request by the State Fauna Board for information about Tasmanian tigers, which were believed to be almost extinct, has brought to light valuable facts about them. The board is not concerned with their protection as animals, but, in view of their scientific interest, it is desirable that the species should not go out of existence.”

There is a hideous dichotomy between public assumptions about this animal, and truth hidden under the surface. If you think any of my comment is melodramatic, or unnecessarily negative, please consider that a detailed understanding of thylacine history might quickly change your mind…

2nd book excerpt: “Language was used in astute ways to create the impression that fauna was being “protected” in Tasmania, when in fact it certainly was not. Prior to 1888, there were “Thylacine Protection Associations”, which might sound to the uninitiated like some kind of benefit to the species. In fact the only aim was to protect the economy from the thylacine by exterminating it as quickly as possible. Tasmanian society had never seen any reason to preserve the actual welfare of its native animals. There was a long history of authorities using the pleasant sounding term “animal protection” to actually mean “protection from animals”, or creating “sanctuaries” where animals could multiply, and thereby “protect” their commercial value. “Ironically, the Animals and Birds Protection Act 1919 ushered in perhaps the greatest marsupial slaughter in Tasmanian history. In the open season winters from 1923 to 1928 about 4.5 million ringtail possum, brush possum, kangaroo and wallaby skins were registered”. And so it was that “The Animals and Birds Protection Board” was now created, to allow government control over Tasmania’s strange and suddenly valuable native animals… Tasmanian authorities managed to placate early conservation voices, by creating an organisation which appeared to “protect” wildlife, but instead existed only to manage wildlife resources in the interest of the State. “The government of the day was closely linked to the rural constituency which opposed protection of an animal they still viewed as vermin and a risk to livestock. Cabinet was able to head off any conservation movement by making administrative changes that shifted control of wildlife management to a newly created government organisation in 1928… Unfortunately for the thylacine, the new Tasmanian Animals and Birds’ Protection Board (later renamed the Tasmanian Fauna Board) was numerically controlled by a majority of newly appointed members selected by Cabinet, representing vested interests supporting the timber industry, the hunting and snaring of native game, and the uncontrolled expansion of agricultural enterprise”.”

1962 PUBLIC COMMENT: “Thank you for your letter of the 12th of March regarding Tasmanian tigers. These animals are wholly protected, as you know, and my Board will not issue any special permits for their capture. My Board has recently received quite good evidence of the existence of the tiger in Tasmania and I am sure you will be pleased to hear of this success. As previously advised, it is only by leaving the animal undisturbed that we can hope to look forward to an increase in population. H.A. Cox, Secretary.”

1963 INTERNAL REPORT: “Progress Report on Efforts to Snare Tasmanian Tiger: On 28th October 1963 a party consisting of Board employees arrived at Green’s Creek area in an attempt to snare Tasmanian tigers.” “Four lines of about 700 snares were set, and an extra 100 put around a suspected thylacine lair.”

2nd book excerpt (later): “Apart from hunting and Museum representatives, the Animals and Birds Protection Board had always been dominated by agricultural interests. The previous Chairman was President of the Tasmanian Farmers and Orchardists Association, and again, it was farmers who hated the thylacine the most. Through the Premier’s direct involvement, the government Minister for Agriculture A. Atkins had overseen the Fauna Board’s latest snaring program.

All involved apparently understood at least one thylacine was living between Greens Creek and Sandy Cape, but that any further Fauna Board effort to catch it would not pay-off. Presence of the species therefore had no value, in fact it was a major potential problem, because somebody else might catch the animal - “the value would then be lost to Tasmania if a Tasmanian did not find it” - and all uncontrollable hell could break loose. Wildlife was owned by the State/Minister/Fauna Board after all, so they would do with it absolutely as they saw fit.

“After that the Agriculture Department used 1080 poison to kill rabbits [plus native herbivores from Greens Creek to Sandy Cape], and many believed that had killed the tiger.” The nearest farm was ten miles away.

Alexander Atkins had been the Minister for both Agriculture and Forestry. It would later be said of State owned Forestry Tasmania during the same period: “As soon as word got around of one there, they’d send in the 1080 to get rid of it. I saw that plenty of times – you’d hear a rumour, then next thing the forestry’s laying 1080 at the exact place”.”

1984 INTERNAL REPORT - Nick Mooney: “The recent sighting confirms that the search area was used by thylacines at least irregularly up until autumn 1982… Over 45 years have passed between the death of the last known thylacine and the 1982 sighting, far longer than the lifespan of such an animal. This alone means that thylacines must be breeding. From the distribution of alleged sightings of different sized animals (meaning different ages), it appears breeding occurs in several areas... Most sightings are of single animals, of a size where they would probably be independent. These animals may be transients, possibly accounting for sightings in some surprising places. Since the thylacine has obviously not recovered from its population crash early this century, we must accept that it probably needs active management help. Just ‘leaving it alone’ may not be good enough... Careful management is needed if this situation is to be improved… It was concluded that the search area was used at least irregularly by thylacines up until Autumn 1982 but use has diminished due to increased disturbance to the point that detection of animals is not probable, despite large efforts. Unless the thylacine observed in March 1982 by the Service biologist was the last of the species it must be accepted that thylacines survive in a number of areas of Tasmania.”

1996 PUBLIC COMMENT - Nick Mooney: “I can categorically state I’ve seen nothing that I’m happy is thylacine in the twelve or thirteen years I’ve been doing this in detail, and I might add in the twenty or thirty years I’ve been interested in this sort of subject.”

There is a huge amount of sordid history, manipulation of public opinion, and it gets a lot worse. Attacking the government is not my aim, and there is no criminality anyway. However proven manipulation of public opinion, and suppression of information, help explain how the thylacine could still exist when virtually all the world thinks it has been extinct since 1936. There is more to this story than you might be aware. Don’t give up on the Tasmanian tiger.

Why should we care?

Most people think of this subject as a whimsical monster hunt, with a quick look at the characters involved, or the money they've spent. But that totally misses the point. The only thing that matters is there is an incredibly valuable animal on the edge of extinction, and we still have a chance to save it. That is not a glib curiosity - it is vitally important!

The survival story alone is so incredible and inspiring, that rediscovery of the thylacine would shock the world. No other species on earth has endured such historical pressures, and remember this is a marsupial; still regarded by many as an inferior, unintelligent, uncompetitive form of life compared to placental mammals. This is the last of the great marsupial megafauna predators. Most of the megafauna die out of the fossil record by about 20,000 years ago. It was a very bad time of extinctions for Australia; every Australian land animal weighing more than 60kg died out, as well as 75% of all species weighing more than 10kg. Reduced prey diversity and hunting pressure is a bad combination for any top order predator. From that entire period only one large carnivore survived, and that was the Tasmanian tiger. It “stepped through the ranks” of the falling species to stand alone as a survivor without equal, so even before Europeans sighted Australia, the thylacine had proven itself to be a species with uncommon will, and uncommon ability to persist - a survivor of ages.

The pre-European thylacine was adaptable - it occupied every habitat from the Nullarbor Plain deserts to the rainforests of north Queensland. But dingoes were the last straw. According to the fossil record dingoes were introduced to the mainland about 6,000 years ago, and with their supposedly more efficient pack hunting strategy they are thought to have out-competed thylacines for food, and/or killed thylacines directly. Introduction of the dingo made Aborigines better hunters. Either way there is little doubt that the dingo directly caused “extinction” of the thylacine on the mainland. But dingoes never made it to Tasmania, and so the magnificent survivor awaited its next challenge - arrival of Europeans. During the government bounty period, disease epidemic, and subsequent habitat loss, the chips were down once again, and the thylacine species must have somehow retreated to areas of safe ground, gathered its resources, then picked up the pieces to face the new era. It has then been able to actively avoid humans for eighty years - so effectively that society thinks it is extinct! To do that the thylacine species must have changed from what it was to become incredibly, unbelievably elusive.

Even allowing for extremely low numbers, inaccessible habitat, and a great deal of luck, the Tasmanian tiger has achieved something remarkable - remarkable to the point of being unbelievable. It reinvented its behaviour to face the new age. Nowhere else in the known history of zoology has such a radical transformation taken place, and no other large animal species on Earth could be so elusive, to avoid humans for so long in such a small place - be it panther or wild dog or fox. The Tasmanian tiger was always elusive, but is now far more so than ever before. If it still exists, then it is now the most elusive animal in the world.

We look to 100 years ago and wish people had more respect for the Tasmanian tiger back then. Well right now we are those people. What will they think 100 years from now, when we had this one last chance to save the magnificent thylacine, to tell its story, and we didn't do anything about it. There are several chariots that drive us forward as conscious beings... love, ambition, patriotism, honour. These things are worth fighting for. Well I say there is another one; respect for a beleaguered animal species. Cut away the ubiquitous fluff, recognise what really matters, take this subject seriously, and let's save the Tasmanian tiger before it is too late.

What should I do if I want to help the thylacine?

Society will not protect an animal it thinks is extinct, so we first need to prove the species exists. If you are physically able, and have a significant amount of spare time, then buy as many game cameras as you can, and conduct your own field search. If you have the ability to launch a major professional scientific search program, then be assured the effort will be justified. All we need to save a magnificent species is one clear thylacine photograph.

If you are not physically able or do not have spare time, then there is still something very important you can do... Give this species a chance, by not assuming it is extinct - and advise others to do the same. There is still a very real chance to save the thylacine, so the more we all work on that basis, the more serious scientific interest it will attract. If the species is assumed to be extinct, then potential advocates logically will not bother investing time in the issue.

If I was to search for the thylacine, where should I look?

The eastern half of Tasmania is likely to be a waste of time. The remote NW (Tarkine wilderness) might be worth investigating, but the best chance of finding it is in the remote SW. Old remote logging or mining tracks are the best way to get in there. There is no specific location to recommend, but it is logical the species would prefer to live in habitat types which are open or patchy rather than thick rainforest.

How long would I need to spend looking for it?

Trying to prove the thylacine still exists is not for tourists. It needs at least 6 months in remote Tasmania just for an introduction to searching. It is the most difficult zoological challenge in Australia, so be prepared for years of fruitless commitment. Also be prepared for however, that if successful and done properly, you will change the world.

Do I need permission to look for the thylacine?

You are allowed to look for whatever you want. Methods used and places to search have always been a sensitive, complex, and difficult issue to navigate. How far should somebody go to prove this animal still exists? What actions are justified to save an entire species? There are deep conflicts of interest everywhere in Tasmania, and vague grey-area regulations which can be used to intimidate a private individual. The Tasmanian government will not help this animal, and most professional scientists won’t take the matter seriously. Well-meaning private searchers in the past have asked "permission" or "help" from so-called authorities, with dubious jurisdiction, who in the interests of themselves or the State, do not want the species to be rediscovered (or not unless they have full control of it). You can imagine the garden path some searchers have ended up on, and once on it you can't get off. If you are truly trying to help this species, then I recommend very careful, professional discretion. As part of proving it exists, there is a chance we could make the species go extinct faster. A large scale professional search effort will require careful navigation through this uniquely complex subject.

Is it necessary for a private individual to work anonymously like you did?

No, but I recommend anonymity or extreme discretion. If you are on a thylacine themed holiday, or an internet publicity stunt, then tell whoever you want. But if you actually intend to help this species, then a degree of professional discretion is required. Don’t underestimate the political complexity of this issue, and again once you are on a bureaucratic garden path you might not be able to get off it.

Where can I find the footprints to look for, and other field sign?

My first book “Magnificent Survivor” has that information. It is available for free download on this website.

What methods should I use to prove the species still exists?

Automatic game cameras are currently the best tool available. One clear thylacine photograph – if presented the right way – will be enough to prove continued existence of the Tasmanian tiger. Better camera designs are invented all the time, and various other new technologies are becoming available. There is currently no need for physical capture.

Can you offer advice on setting cameras?

There is a lot to it. Most think they can set some cameras for a couple of weeks, check the cards and find an answer, but it doesn't work that way. If you are serious, then allow six months just to iron out the bugs in camera operation, settings, and choice of sites, before the real work begins.

The most important strategy is to find sites which are already clear of vegetation. Cameras need a clear field of view in front of them. If you have to start trimming vegetation it will take too long, grow back, and the extra disturbance might mean a thylacine won't walk in front of your cameras anyway. Look for naturally cleared areas with movement bottlenecks, or man-made trails. I found old logging tracks to be best because access was easier - you can get in & out fast, with minimal abnormal disturbance.

If you can get there, then other humans will also. My cameras were found plenty of times, but almost never disturbed by members of the public. PWS, STT (Forestry Tasmania), and mine managers have stolen or destroyed my cameras, also illegal shooters, contract shooters, bike riders where they are not supposed to be, or anybody else with something to hide. That means you need to work with extreme discretion, and choose likely sites with a lot of animal traffic, that are also unlikely to be discovered. I found camouflaging the cameras to he more trouble than it was worth.

Some fieldworkers find existing animal/game trails to be productive, but for me the return on effort was low. Remember these cameras only work satisfactorily about half the time, so if you go too far off-trail, you might find the effort or disturbance of getting in there make it impractical. It might be better to work around the edges of a remote area and wait for the animal to walk out, rather than set cams right in the middle.

Always use lithium batteries, and choose a mid range camera model which is cost effective and works well enough. Use a model with a seperate bracket which screws to the tree, so you can take the cam on & off, swap it, work on it etc. without needing to re-aim it every time. Don't bother with the video setting - all we need is one clear photo. Video is great, but it consumes memory & battery, risking card or battery failure during the monitoring period.

Setting cameras at a culvert or bridge across a creek is good, because animal traffic gets concentrated, however extra moisture in the air at wetter sites can cause long term bad luck; bad card reads, short battery life, haywire electronics or condensation inside the cam. Camera models which are not properly sealed will waste your time & effort.

The longer you set and leave a cam working the better - three to six months is best. Any number of cams in the bush is better than none, but a serious effort would be 50 or more. The app "Offline Maps" (Psyberia) is good for finding and recording site locations.

What should I do if I obtain a clear thylacine photograph or other evidence?

Take it to Professor Barry Brook at the University of Tasmania – he will know what to do with it in a respectful manner. Barry Brook is best qualified to help begin the process of possible thylacine recovery.

If you want to be part of a merry circus, then hand it to a newspaper, PWS, or the Hobart Museum. There is no harm in making money or publicity from the thylacine issue, so long as the species’ welfare comes first (if personal benefit is the aim then it can come later). If you are juvenile enough to hoax evidence, then it will go nowhere and you will be immortalised as a fool. Remember that will make it harder for actual evidence to be accepted in the future.

What is Tigerman's "massive" second book, and when will it be released?

I have been writing a second book since 2007, which is currently around 4000 pages with 2000 pictures, all fully referenced to the publication and page. It tells the full thylacine story, with all of the filthy politics, some humour, and some inspirational moments. The purpose of it was to create a foundation for rediscovery of the Tasmanian tiger. To date the species has not been rediscovered, so the book remains unpublished. “The Edge of the World – Rediscovery of Thylacinus cynocephalus” will be released at some point when I find a proper use for it.

Is the blue and white tiger boat for sale, how big are the motors, and can you sleep in it?

Yes it is for sale. The boat seen in Tim Noonan’s “Hunt for Truth/Tigermania” is a Kevlar ex-offshore racing Supercat, with 2 x 400hp Mercury Verado R racing engines. It has a king-sized bed and toilet downstairs. The tiger boat “High Force 2” and matching Unimog tow vehicle are now available on internet boat sale websites.

—————————————————————————————————————