Long before firecrackers and electric fences became familiar responses to wild elephants entering villages, rural Sri Lankans practised “gunen keema”, respectfully appealing to elephants to return to the forest. Anthropologist Dr. Praneeth Abhayasundara revisits this forgotten tradition alongside new scientific findings on how elephants recognise human voices, examining what both can teach us about fear, coexistence and the growing human-elephant conflict.
By Dr. Praneeth Abhayasundara, Former Professor of Anthropology
When a wild elephant or an entire herd enters a village, the immediate response is often to shout, create loud noises, light firecrackers or use other means to frighten the animals away.
Behind these actions lies a familiar assumption: wild animals are highly sensitive to human voices and scents, and will retreat when they recognise the presence of people.
Modern research into animal behaviour, however, reveals a more complex relationship between elephants and humans.
Wild animals do not simply recognise human voices and smells. Some can distinguish familiar people from strangers and modify their responses according to previous experiences.
Recognition does not necessarily mean trust, nor does familiarity guarantee that an animal is no longer afraid.
Understanding these distinctions offers a different perspective on Sri Lanka’s increasingly serious human-elephant conflict.
When Villagers Appealed to Elephants Through Virtue
In earlier generations, when encounters between elephants and villagers were less widespread than today, some communities in Nuwarakalaviya and Hattikoralaya, areas within present-day Anuradhapura and Kurunegala districts, practised a peaceful tradition known as gunen keema, loosely translated as “speaking through virtue.”
Rather than immediately attempting to frighten approaching elephants, villagers would respectfully appeal to them to return to the forest.
These appeals invoked the virtues of the Buddha, sought the protection of local deities and acknowledged the elephants’ own need for food and shelter.
A traditional entreaty was expressed in words resembling the following:
Dear children, to satisfy the hunger of our own young ones, leave the little we have cultivated and go into the great forests that the gods Aiyyanayake and Dahanaka Bandara have bequeathed to you, and satisfy your hunger by eating and drinking what is there. Even though we make a chena or a paddy field, we do not break into your great forest. May the blessings of Sirima Bo monks be with you.
Villagers also regarded elephants as majestic creatures worthy of respect, often addressing them as “elephant kings.”
Elderly residents of these regions retain memories of occasions when elephants reportedly withdrew quietly after hearing such appeals.
These recollections possess considerable folkloric and cultural value. They do not, however, scientifically establish that elephants understood Buddhist virtues, recognised the meaning of the spoken words or retreated because of the appeals.
Their significance lies elsewhere.
The tradition demonstrates that some rural communities approached encounters with dangerous wildlife through restraint, respect and an acknowledgement that animals, too, possess a place in the natural environment.
From an anthropological perspective, such practices reveal how cultural beliefs influence human behaviour towards wildlife.
How Animals Become Accustomed to Human Presence
Zoology offers an important concept for understanding how animals respond to repeated encounters with people: habituation.
Habituation occurs when an animal’s response to a repeatedly encountered, non-harmful stimulus gradually diminishes.
An animal that initially retreats upon seeing a person may become less fearful if repeated encounters do not result in harm.
Similar changes can occur in response to familiar human voices and scents.
Yet habituation should not be confused with the complete disappearance of fear.
Recognising a particular scent, identifying a familiar voice and becoming accustomed to a stimulus are related but distinct processes.
Their effects vary according to species, age, environment, past experiences and the nature of an animal’s relationship with humans.
Many mammals possess highly developed olfactory abilities.
Elephants, bears, wolves, jackals and deer can detect environmental changes through smell, including chemical signals associated with human presence.
Scents left along paths, compounds released by the human body and odours retained on clothing may provide animals with information about nearby activity.
However, detecting a human scent does not automatically cause an animal to flee.
Where repeated experiences indicate that a familiar scent poses no immediate threat, an animal’s response may become less pronounced.
The ability to recognise humans must therefore be distinguished from the fear humans expect animals to experience.
New Research Shows Elephants Recognise Human Voices
An important contribution to this discussion appeared in June 2026 in Behavioural Processes, an international scientific journal published by Elsevier.
The study, titled Are You Talking to Me? Captive Asian Elephants React to Voice Familiarity and Elephant-Directed Speech, examined how Asian elephants responded to different human voices.
Researchers studied eight captive Asian elephants living in two zoological facilities in France.
Recorded human voices were played to the animals, allowing researchers to examine their responses to familiar and unfamiliar speakers.
The researchers also distinguished between two forms of speech.
Elephant-directed speech involved the higher pitch and more varied intonation that caretakers commonly use when communicating with elephants.
Adult-directed speech referred to the more conventional manner in which people address other adults.
The results revealed that elephants could distinguish between familiar and unfamiliar voices and respond differently to the two speech patterns.
When familiar caretakers’ voices were played, elephants displayed behaviour consistent with searching for those individuals.
Responses associated with searching for caretakers were also stronger when the elephants heard speech specifically directed towards them.
These findings suggest that elephants possess sophisticated abilities to recognise human vocal characteristics and adjust their behaviour accordingly.
Nevertheless, researchers also observed increased alertness and arousal in response to human voices.
Greater attention does not necessarily indicate reduced fear or increased trust.
There is another important limitation.
The research involved captive elephants accustomed to regular human interaction in controlled environments.
Its findings cannot automatically be extended to wild elephants entering villages, where previous encounters with humans may have involved threats, injuries or attempts to drive them away.
The study provides evidence of elephants’ capacity to recognise voices, not proof that a particular form of speech can safely repel wild elephants.
Why Firecrackers and Shouting May Lose Their Effect
When an elephant enters a settlement, loud noises and firecrackers may sometimes cause it to retreat.
Such measures, however, do not necessarily remain effective indefinitely.
If an elephant repeatedly encounters a particular sound without experiencing harm, it may gradually become accustomed to that stimulus.
A noise that initially frightened the animal could consequently lose some of its effect.
The opposite danger must also be considered.
Sudden, excessive noise may cause an elephant to flee unpredictably, creating risks for people, homes and the animal itself.
Female elephants accompanied by calves, as well as injured or distressed animals, may behave in particularly unpredictable ways when threatened.
For these reasons, villagers should not surround, approach, chase or independently attempt to drive away wild elephants.
Maintaining a safe distance and obtaining guidance from trained wildlife officials remains essential.
Some communities have complained that adequate advice is not always available. Others have criticised what they perceive as political interference in wildlife administration.
Such complaints highlight the need for competent, accessible and professionally independent wildlife management.
The responsibility for responding to dangerous encounters should not fall upon frightened villagers acting without specialised knowledge.
Human-Elephant Conflict Is Also a Land-Use Problem
Elephant behaviour represents only one part of Sri Lanka’s human-elephant conflict.
Changes in land use and the environment also play a major role.
The obstruction of traditional elephant movement routes, fragmentation of forest habitats, expansion of human settlements and cultivation close to forest boundaries have increased the opportunities for dangerous encounters.
As natural habitats become fragmented, elephants may enter agricultural areas while searching for food, water or access to familiar movement routes.
Addressing the conflict therefore requires more than trying to frighten animals away after they enter a village.
Long-term measures must include protecting elephant corridors, reducing habitat fragmentation, maintaining properly designed electric fences and safeguarding the natural resources on which wildlife depends.
Effective intervention also requires coordination between conservation authorities and affected communities.
When elephants enter settlements, trained personnel should assess the circumstances and guide any necessary response.
Human safety and wildlife conservation must remain central to those decisions.
What Ancient Wisdom and Modern Science Can Teach Us
One of the most valuable lessons emerging from animal-behaviour research is that wildlife does not respond to humans solely through instinct.
Animals observe their surroundings, recognise environmental signals and modify their behaviour through experience.
Some distinguish familiar human voices. Others associate human scents with particular activities or past encounters.
These abilities demonstrate that the relationship between people and wild animals is more complex than a simple contest between fear and force.
Yet familiarity should never be mistaken for affection, obedience or an assurance of safety.
An elephant accustomed to human presence remains a powerful wild animal whose behaviour can change rapidly.
Conservation should therefore prioritise the environmental conditions that allow elephants to maintain their natural way of life, rather than encouraging them to become increasingly accustomed to people.
The traditional practice of gunen keema reflects an earlier cultural willingness to approach wildlife with restraint rather than immediate aggression.
Modern zoology, meanwhile, provides evidence that animal behaviour is shaped by experience, recognition and environmental circumstances.
The two approaches cannot be treated as scientifically equivalent. Nevertheless, they can contribute to a broader understanding of coexistence.
Just as humans learn to recognise the behaviour of wild animals, those animals also learn to recognise human activity.
Whether such encounters produce fear, tolerance or dangerous confrontation is influenced, in part, by how people behave and how the surrounding environment has been altered.
Resolving Sri Lanka’s human-elephant conflict requires knowledge of elephant behaviour, responsible human conduct and long-term protection of natural habitats.
The peaceful attitude reflected in the traditions of earlier generations offers a valuable ethical lesson. Scientific research provides the behavioural understanding needed to inform modern conservation.
Taken together, they remind us that living alongside elephants cannot be achieved through noise, intimidation or force alone. It requires informed decisions, patience and respect for the needs of both people and wildlife.
— Dr. Praneeth Abhayasundara, Former Professor of Anthropology
