Why stigmatise poor birds and insects by naming cyclones after them?

It seems quite unfair that the humungous, spinning mass of engorged clouds currently bearing down on coastal Andhra and Orissa with destructive intent is named after the very innocuous crested hoopoe bird, or Hudhud. After all, the only creatures that have reason to fear hudhuds are grubs and insects — their preferred meal. If indeed Cyclone Hudhud wreaks havoc, the entire species name will stand besmirched for no fault of its own! The stipulation that names for hurricanes, typhoons and cyclones must not be culturally insensitive is well taken, though ci-devant Greek and Roman gods could pass without protest. But surely, there must be some degree of appropriateness in the names suggested by the relevant countries along the major storm alleys?

It is not necessary, however, to be excessively cautious like India, which has put forward the very neutral, predictable and Sanskrit-centric offerings of Agni, Akash, Bijli, Jal, Lehar, Megh, Sagar and Vayu for the kitty of names for the Indian Ocean’s cyclones, instead of more menacing alternatives such as Gabbar, Mogambo or even Don. But these are probably more suitable than Pakistan’s offerings of Bulbul and Titli (among others), which, if they happen to be bestowed on really deadly storms, will unnecessarily vilify the subcontinent’s beloved nightingale and butterfly.