I think they meant in terms of American cultural understanding, not latitude. I suspect most Americans don’t think of Russia as in Asia (despite the fact that it is) or Japan as being as far north as it actually is.
Same for Europe. I'd guess that most Americans would be surprised to find out that Paris, France is farther north than Seattle. If you slide Paris over to Washington it would be somewhere just south of the border with Canada.
If you slide it over to the east side of North America it would, appropriately, be in the Canadian province of Quebec.
Madrid, Spain is farther north than San Francisco or Denver. It's just half a degree south of New York.
It really shows how there is much more to climate than latitude. Most of Germany and all of the UK and Ireland are at latitudes that in North America put you well into "it is way too freaking cold here way too many days of the year!" territory, but thanks largely to the effects of currents in the Atlantic ocean they have much milder climates.
Yes, we learn this at geography at school here. The USA does not have barriers like mountains protecting it from North-South (since Rocky Mountains for example go North-South), whereas in Europe this is quite different in countries like the ones near the Mediterranean Sea. Also, the USA is of course simply quite large.
Japan isn't any farther north than the US. The northernmost island, Hokkaido, is indeed pretty far north (I think roughly the same latitude as Oregon, and also southern France), but most of the rest is quite a bit farther south. Tokyo (where most travelers visit, and 1/4-1/3 of the population lives) is I think roughly the same latitude as North Carolina, and is quite warm. Japan is nowhere near as far north as Alaska, if that's what you're thinking, and not even nearly as far north as much of Europe.
The premise that the USDA avoided calling this the Northern Asian Giant Hornet to avoid the implication that this came from North Korea seems quite absurd to me.
Huh? The North Korea confusion angle was raised to explain why they might not have called it the Northern Asian Giant Hornet to distinguish it from the Southern Asian variety. That's what I'm responding to, nested in the thread.
In a better world, it would be absurd. But America has quite a few no-excuse-is-too-weak xenophobes, who have a documented history of violence against random strangers, for the "crime" of looking "Asian".
That could explain why they don't want to call it Asian, but not why they would want to avoid an implication that it came from North Korea specifically.
I'm not paying close attention here, but the "because North Korea..." seems like a useful diversion, if your goals look like:
1 - Announce the seeming eradication of a dangerous invasive species
2 - While minimizing "any excuse" xenophobic human nastiness related to saying "Asian"
3 - And disguise your second goal, to minimize accusations of "pro-Asian Wokery" (or whatever phrase the nut jobs on that side of the culture wars are currently using) from your #2
4 - Also minimize left-wing backlash (I've no clue what phrases they'd use) to your #3 scheme
But that "ridiculous theory" was part of the stated motivation of the person who authored the submission for the new name.
"""
Furthermore, anti-Asian sentiment and hate crimes have risen during the COVID-19 pandemic, Looney notes, and labeling an invasive species perceived negatively as “Asian” can be harmful all around.
"""
