Variation in early nutrition is often a strong predictor of offspring condition and fitness. In the case of woodland passerine birds, nestling diet is determined by the spatiotemporal distribution of prey items such as caterpillars during the nestling period, and is usually quantified as differences in provisioning behaviour between habitats. However, the habitat level does not account for variation between individual territories, the level at which competition and selection are assumed to operate. Here we use nestbox cameras and Radio Frequency Identification technology (RFID) to simultaneously assess variation in both nestling diet (components) and provisioning rates (quantity) among a sample (n 022) of different quality great tit Parus major territories selected from a larger breeding population (n 0310 fledged broods) in a single year. Caterpillars were by far the most numerous item provisioned to nestlings (mean 075% of prey items), as expected given the known importance of this food source for this species. Broods raised close to an oak tree, or far from the woodland edge, were provisioned the highest proportion of caterpillars. Provisioning rates declined seasonally and there was a weak association between low provisioning rates and caterpillar rich diets. During the first week of the nestling stage, nestling condition was unrelated to the proportion of caterpillars in the diet, provisioning rates and oak proximity. Condition at fledging was slightly improved in broods fed a higher proportion of caterpillars in the diet and in broods raised close to an oak tree. However, in our data early breeding was the only predictor of recruitment success, although power was low for this test. Analyses of long-term data (41 years) from the same population confirmed a relationship between oak proximity and fledgling mass, but not recruitment success. Our results suggest that territory level environmental variation can affect offspring condition, probably through observed changes in nestling diet, but that such variation does not necessarily produce discernable effects on offspring fitness.

Increasing habitat fragmentation and human population growth in Africa has resulted in an escalation in human-elephant conflict between small-scale farmers and free-ranging African elephants (Loxodonta Africana). In 2012 Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) implemented the national 10-year Conservation and Management Strategy for the Elephant in Kenya, which includes an action aimed at testing whether beehive fences can be used to mitigate human-elephant conflict. From 2012 to 2015, we field-tested the efficacy of beehive fences to protect 10 0.4-ha farms next to Tsavo East National Park from elephants. We hung a series of beehives every 10 m around the boundary of each farm plot. The hives were linked with strong wire. After an initial pilot test with 2 farms, the remaining 8 of 10 beehive fences also contained 2-dimensional dummy hives between real beehives to help reduce the cost of the fence. Each trial plot had a neighboring control plot of the same size within the same farm. Of the 131 beehives deployed 88% were occupied at least once during the 3.5-year trial. Two hundred and fifty-three elephants, predominantly 20-45 years old entered the community farming area, typically during the crop- ripening season. Eighty percent of the elephants that approached the trial farms were kept out of the areas protected by the beehive fences, and elephants that broke a fence were in smaller than average groups. Beehive fences not only kept large groups of elephants from invading the farmland plots but the farmers also benefited socially and financially from the sale of 228 kg of elephant-friendly honey. As news of the success of the trial spread, a further 12 farmers requested to join the project, bringing the number of beehive fence protected farms to 22 and beehives to 297. This demonstrates positive adoption of beehive fences as a community mitigation tool. Understanding the response of elephants to the beehive fences, the seasonality of crop raiding and fence breaking, and the willingness of the community to engage with the mitigation method will help contribute to future management strategies for this high human-elephant conflict hotspot and other similar areas in Kenya.

Increasing elephant populations in Kenya since 1989 have been widely praised as a conservation success story. However, where elephants and agricultural land overlap, incidents of human-elephant conflict are on the increase. Wildlife managers and farmers are now trying different farm-based deterrents to keep elephants out of crops. Here, we present data on the effectiveness of a novel beehive fence deployed in a Turkana community of 62 communally run farms in Kenya. Specifically, 1700 m of beehive fences semi-surrounded the outer boundaries of seventeen farms, and we compared elephant farm invasion events with these and to seventeen neighbouring farms whose boundaries were 'protected' only by thorn bush barriers. We present data from 45 farm invasions, or attempted invasions, recorded over 2 years. Thirteen groups of elephants approached the beehive fences and turned away. Of the 32 successful farm invasions, only one bull elephant broke through the beehive fences. These results demonstrate that beehive fences are more effective than thorn bush barriers at deterring elephants and may have a role to play in alleviating farmer-elephant conflict. Additionally, the harvesting of 106 kg of honey during the trial period suggests that beehive fences may also improve crop production and enhance rural livelihoods through honey sales.Key words: African elephants, beehive fences, beekeeping, crop-raiding, farm-based deterrents, human-elephant conflict Résumé L'accroissement des populations d'éléphants au Kenya depuis 1989 a été largement salué comme une victoire de la conservation. Cependant, là où éléphants et terrains agricoles se rencontrent, les incidences de conflits hommeséléphants sont de plus en plus nombreuses. Les gestionnaires de faune et les exploitants agricoles essaient aujourd'hui différents moyens dissuasifs pour garder les éléphants loin des cultures. Nous présentons ici les données sur l'efficacité d'une clôture originale intégrant des ruches déployée dans une communauté turkana comptant 62 exploitations gérées collectivement au Kenya. Très pré-cisément, 1 700 mètres de clôtures avec ruches entouraient à moitié les limites extérieures de 17 exploitations, et nous avons comparé les incidences totales d'invasions par les éléphants par rapport à ces dernières et aussi à 17 exploitations voisines qui ne sont protégées que par des barrières de buissons épineux. Nous présentons des données portant sur 45 invasions, réelles ou tentées, enregistrées en deux ans. Treize groupes d'éléphants se sont approchés des barrières avec ruches et se sont éloignés. Sur les 32 invasions réussies, seul un mâle a traversé les barrières avec les ruches. Ces résultats montrent que ces clôtures sont plus efficaces que celles qui sont composées de buissons épineux pour dissuader les éléphants et qu'elles ont donc un rôle à jouer pour réduire les conflits entre exploitants agricoles et éléphants. De plus, la récolte de 106 kilos de miel pendant la période d'essai suggère que les clôtures avec ruches pourraient aussi augmenter ...