Well the issue would be that it hurts the local population. And maybe you can prevent them from getting hurt, if you try to come up with a good warning.
But there's an opportunity cost. You pay a whole interdisciplinary committee to sit on their asses thinking about it for n weeks (I don't even want to know how long it took). You could take that money and use it on a million other things that would result in a larger reduction of people-getting-hurt.
What would that be? Those million other things that prevent people 1000, 2000, 5000 years from now from getting hurt? A good warning seems like a great idea, and low cost, high impact. Problem is, no language has lasted for 10,000 years.
