People are reporting sightings of the Tasmanian tiger, thought to be extinct
cnn.com
cnn.com
While I don't think it's impossible, I'm not sure what's new here except the fact that almost everyone now carries a camera yet we're still to get clear images ;)
But I'm biased, I'm a moose believer (or as I like to call it, a moother) based on the circumstantial evidence, but a lot of people are skeptical a creature as large as a moose could keep a low profile that long.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/103196185/new-zealands-moos...
The fact that no-one saw them while helicopters were beating the bush during the goldrush red deer helicopter hunting years counts against them, but my pet theory is that moose love water, and there's plenty of swamps in Fiordland (if there's a flat bit, it's probably a swamp) to hide from helicopters in.
Similar story of US Airmen releasing their mascot pumas into the wild.
From what I've seen personally, feral gets can get BIG. Like mastiff-sized. So I tend to believe these rumours but take their origins with various grains of salt.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2005-11-28/tests-reveal-super-si...
I love how big the world is sometimes.
Great stuff, in a mix of Māori and laid back NZ English.
Exactly this. The absence of clear photographs has much more negative predictive value now that almost everyone is carrying a cell phone with a camera almost all the time they are away from home.
They weren't silent animals either, and were fond of raiding sheep, chickens etc., from farms (the reason they were exterminated). It doesn't seem plausible to me that they'd survive with such a low profile for circa 90 years.
Animals are also hard to take pictures of. I've been trying to get a good picture of a squirrel from my yard for a friend of mine for weeks now but the little bastards are quick. By the time I get the camera app open they're gone.
I have no idea what these people are thinking and like you would prefer to actually experience it myself, but I'd expect at least one of them to have reached for their phone before they even realized what they were recording.
There's also been dedicated people heading out with night vision cameras, they've found nothing either.
Surely it must be that the feline predator looming deep in the human psyche is what lies beneath these apparitions.
Like the Loch Ness monster, but ore likely to be real.
(Which is not saying much!)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tasmanian_devil > Tasmanian devils can eliminate all traces of a carcass of a smaller animal, devouring the bones and fur if desired.
The poo one is interesting - no matter how hard I google, I can't find an image of thylacine shit, so not sure how you'd differentiate it from other animals' scat.
>They are also found near roads where roadkill is prevalent, although the devils themselves are often killed by vehicles while retrieving the carrion.
From the Tasmanian Devil wiki page.
Considering the quality of the average person's pictures, I don't think the proliferation of cameraphones will help us get clear picture.
Pictures, yes. Pictures of blurry, smeary things in the corner of the frame. But clear, well-framed pictures are beyond the capability of 95% of the public.
https://www.theguardian.com/global/2019/apr/14/britains-big-...
I couldn't see any stripes clearly in the 2 seconds in was in the mirror. I dismissed it as a dog because (a) it was daylight and Thylacine's are purported to be nocturnal (b) it was near reasonably trafficked road and they are known to be shy and (c) I don't think the population of the Tassie Tiger was very strong in the North Western part of the island where I was.
But what if?? <thinking face emoji>
You’d think the most obvious sign of a living Thylacine would be poop.
Poop isn’t nocturnal and doesn’t run away when spotted.
Is there anyone who claims to have found Tassie Tiger poop?
...from "mainland" Australia perhaps.
"newly released Australian government documents"
...aren't from the federal government, but from the Tasmanian state government.
These "detailed" sightings are almost universally worthless.
Haha, Tasmania is a state of Australia and they are a little sensitive about slips of the tongue implying Australia is a separate place to them.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-06/tasmanian-tiger-sight...
It's not exactly convincing.
Or a feral cat: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-15/feral-cat-caught-on-c...
Feral cats are capable of killing pademelons: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-30/scientists-catch-a-fe...
And feral cats can grow to be quite large and feisty: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-07/truckie-saves-pet-fer...
The New Yorker had an outstanding article about the small group of people who think it might have survived: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/07/02/the-obsessive-...
They're sort of like big foot hunters, except the animal they're looking for used to exist.
Similar for Moas in NZ.
Or Bigfoot, Loch Ness monster.
Hearsay of sightings should not be news. Quality video evidence is the only thing that should get to a news site.
Maybe Tasmanian tiger this year and Mokele-mbembe next year? Not impossible. Though unlikely.
Rediscovery of "extinct" species is common place, because of the inherent difficulty in proving that all individuals of a given species are dead. Combine this with the robustness of biology, allowing species to quickly boom under favorable conditions, and then false extinction ends up happening more often than you would probably suspect. It's normal for many healthy populations to fluctuate wildly around a given carrying capacity. r-selected organisms are particularly notorious for having like 95% of the population die off regularly, and then bouncing back in a few years.
In the case of the thylacine, it's a macro organism so it probably has a higher profile when compared to a small gecko. So the likelihood that they're still extant probably isn't quite as high, unfortunately.