The spatial monitoring and reporting tool (SMART) is being implemented in Tanzania's protected areas to help improve the efficiency of ranger patrols. Unfortunately, there has been no attempt to understand users' perspectives regarding site‐specific factors likely to affect its use. In this study, we investigated the perspectives of staff in Ugalla Game Reserve, a protected area in western Tanzania, to understand the challenges that affect the use of SMART in the reserve. The main challenges included a lack of motivation to use SMART, limited knowledge of SMART among game scouts, insufficient ranger capacity, difficulty collecting data during night patrols, limited resources for patrolling, and difficulty accessing some remote sections of Ugalla. The presence of trophy hunting company patrol teams has led Ugalla rangers to concentrate their effort in less‐patrolled areas. We recommend introducing incentives to encourage game rangers to use SMART alongside improving patrol coverage in wet seasons. Advanced and regular refresher trainings in SMART should be conducted to enhance data collection. Furthermore, game scouts should be trained and equipped to participate effectively in the SMART process. Although SMART is now becoming increasingly popular in Tanzania, understanding local factors that influence its implementation will be important to improve uptake.

Unauthorised use of natural resources is one of the challenges facing protected areas in Africa. Understanding factors influencing this behaviour can help improve the efficiency of conservation efforts. We conducted focus group discussions with authorised resource users and managers in the Ugalla ecosystem of western Tanzania to determine factors facilitating and motivating unauthorised hunting. The two groups of study participants had different perspectives on the subject. Resource managers dwelt on factors facilitating hunting, for example, inadequate patrol resources and impassable patrol roads. On the other hand, resource users discussed both motivating factors, for example, limited income‐generating opportunities; and facilitating factors, some of which were also mentioned by resource managers (e.g., poorly managed hunting cases). There was also variability in how study participants perceived the importance of different factors. Some factors were perceived as highly important but mentioned less frequently and others were mentioned often but ranked low. Some were mentioned by both resource managers and users with the same frequency but ranked differently (e.g., the management of unauthorised hunting cases). Overall, we suggest considering the views of people with different interests in natural resources to comprehensively understand the factors that influence unauthorised hunting for improved conservation outcomes.