Poaching can disrupt wildlife-management efforts in community-based natural resource management systems. Monitoring, estimating, and acquiring data on poaching is difficult. We used local-stakeholder knowledge and poaching records to rank and map the risk of poaching incidents in 2 areas where natural resources are managed by community members in Caprivi, Namibia. We mapped local stakeholder perceptions of the risk of poaching, risk of wildlife damage to livelihoods, and wildlife distribution and compared these maps with spatially explicit records of poaching events. Recorded poaching events and stakeholder perceptions of where poaching occurred were not spatially correlated. However, the locations of documented poaching events were spatially correlated with areas that stakeholders perceived wildlife as a threat to their livelihoods. This result suggests poaching occurred in response to wildlife damage occurred. Local stakeholders thought that wildlife populations were at high risk of being poached and that poaching occurred where there was abundant wildlife. These findings suggest stakeholders were concerned about wildlife resources in their community and indicate a need for integrated and continued monitoring of poaching activities and further interventions at the wildlife-agricultural interface. Involving stakeholders in the assessment of poaching risks promotes their participation in local conservation efforts, a central tenet of community-based management. We considered stakeholders poaching informants, rather than suspects, and our technique was spatially explicit. Different strategies to reduce poaching are likely needed in different areas. For example, interventions that reduce human-wildlife conflict may be required in residential areas, and increased and targeted patrolling may be required in more remote areas. Stakeholder-generated maps of human-wildlife interactions may be a valuable enforcement and intervention support tool. Keywords: conservancies, conservation criminology, enforcement, GIS, human-wildlife conflict, local knowledge, participatory mapping, risk perception.