The onslaught of destruction wrought upon the thylacine by the European settlers of Tasmania came about largely as a result of fear, ignorance, misunderstanding, outright apathy, and even illogical hatred.  While the thylacine was frequently blamed for losses of sheep and other domestic livestock, records show that in reality these losses were more often attributable to thieves as well as feral dogs which roamed the countryside.
 

Farmers no doubt felt threatened by a "tiger" or "wolf" however, and their fears were taken into consideration by the Van Diemen's Land Company (a settlement company), and later by the Tasmanian government itself, when the first "tiger man" was commissioned in 1838 at Woolnorth.  Soon afterward, trappers could transform the severed head of a slain thylacine into money.  Later, the government began paying a pound sterling (£) for the scalp of an adult animal, which at the time was equivalent to about half a week's wages.

. This image comes from a well known film made at the Hobart Zoo (Domain site) in 1933.  The film has appeared in many wildlife and natural history documentaries over the years.

    Apart from the monetary "reward", a person who was the killer of an alleged "sheep killer" gained much praise from farmers.  Many proficient thylacine hunters did not cash in their "trophies" at the nearest police station, but instead rode with the disembodied head from farm to farm seeking the awe of thankful farmers, and to reap private rewards.  Rotting and no longer presentable heads were simply tossed aside into the underbrush, so the actual number of thylacines killed was undoubtedly larger than that quoted by the government.
 

. A juvenile thylacine with erect tail crest at the London Zoo, circa 1909.

That bounty count however, is truly appalling - during the 17 years between 1888-1905, more than 2000 thylacines fell victim to hunters.  The peak was reached in the year 1900 with bounty for 153 dead thylacines, 15 of which were juvenile or young animals.  By 1908 bounty was only paid out for 17 animals, and finally, between 1910-1912, there were no more bounties; the thylacine had become too rare.  It is said by some that an epizootic disease similar to distemper also further scourged the thylacine population at beginning of the 20th century.

    The introduction of dogs to Tasmania was also a factor in the decline of the thylacine, although not as a result of direct confrontation between the two species.  The occasional killing of a thylacine by hunters' dogs would not have affected the thylacine's numbers in any major way.  However, feral dogs were certainly responsible for a large number of sheep kills which at the time were conveniently blamed on the thylacine.  The misplaced perception by farmers that the thylacine was responsible for all sheep kills would definitely have been a significant contribution in the demise of thylacine populations.  The government bounty was therefore wrongly placed on the thylacine, rather than the packs of feral dogs that roamed Tasmania.

    It is maintained by some that the disappearance of the thylacine on the Australian mainland several thousand years ago correlates directly with the arrival of the dingo (Canis familiaris dingo).  According to Meggitt, human migrants from Southeast Asia brought the dingo to Australia some 5000-3000 years ago, after which it reverted back to a wild existence.  If ecological competition between the thylacine and dingo did indeed occur on the Australian mainland, it seems that former held out under pressure for a considerable length of time.  According to zoologist Ernst Mayr, a competition for survival can only be supposed if "two species are simultaneously directed towards essentially the same but only limited quantity of available resources in the environment".
 

Taking into consideration the great variety of prey eaten by both species however, they were not directed to any one particular food source.  As neither the thylacine nor dingo were restricted to any specific habitat, intense competition between the two species seems unlikely.  Additionally, the thylacine is known to be primarily a nocturnal predator, whereas the dingo hunts by day.  This may have actually resulted in each avoiding the other rather effectively.  Lastly, the thylacine (at least, an adult) is physically more powerful than an average dingo, and would have had an advantage in any direct confrontations.  However, the dingo is a faster runner.  The brain of the thylacine weighs considerably less (avg. 2 oz. (55 g)) than that of the dingo (avg. 3 oz. (91 g)); though one should certainly not assume that a smaller brain diminishes the ability of a mammal species to survive.  Indeed, nature has repeatedly shown that a smaller brain size is by no means a guarantee of failure (also, that a larger brain is not an assurance of success).  In truth, there is as of yet no truly conclusive explanation for the disappearance of the thylacine from the Australian mainland and New Guinea.

. This photo of a young thylacine was taken in 1915 at Mary G. Roberts's Beaumaris Zoo (which later was relocated and became known as the Hobart Zoo).  The thylacine was collared by Almer Saward as a pet before its sale to the zoo by animal dealer James Harrison.  Shown here still wearing the collar, the animal appears to have simply given up all resistance.