Abstract
Few studies explicitly assess the robustness and practicality of occupancy analysis informed by local inhabitants, compared to estimates from conventional monitoring methods within different contexts. This study evaluates the efficacy and robustness of occupancy models based on camera trap data, and two locally informed methods: seasonal interviews and hunter diaries, for monitoring 13 hunted mammal species in south‐eastern Cameroon. We triangulate estimates of detectability and occupancy to assess the precision and comparability of their estimates for different species, and their cost. Camera trap estimates are comparable with estimates from locally informed methods in 7 of 11 available cases, but produced the lowest detection probabilities for all species in both villages. While camera traps provide robust estimates for abundant species with a high detection probability, locally informed methods can provide estimates of occupancy comparable to camera trap estimates, but at significantly less cost. They are particularly useful where camera trap detection rates (p) are too low to produce robust occupancy model estimates, notably for rare or cryptic species. The methods, survey effort and animals that can be monitored robustly vary between villages. As such, consideration should be given before monitoring commences to ensure that the most effective and informative approach is used.