If you're winging in to Albany, then I'd suggest making your way to the Adirondack Park ... there's more old growth up there than you can shake a paintbrush at. No special clothing needed, other than what common sense dictates, and good hiking boots.

Rosebud Sue...it's been a year, did you get to the forest? If you head up to the Adirondack park, you Do and should pack survival gear. The weather in the high peaks changes rapidly. Ask any 46er what they recommend. Incase you don't know, there are 46 high peaks, and quite a few people make it a goal to climb them all. And if you happen to search out the wilderness of northern New Hampshire you must have tick repellant, wear a hat, and tuck your pants into your socks. You will still get them on you, but it all helps. Just have fun out there!

Hi Scott, I’d sure like to see what the ancient forests looked like too; our old growth remnants give us a reasonably good idea, but I always wonder about that. I’m not sure the forest leaf litter was ever 3 feet deep, that seems unlikely with all the forces of decomposition in play. There are no native earthworms in the northeast part of the country, wherever glaciers had buried the land; when you realize they were thousands of feet thick and were there for thousands of years, it makes sense that nothing survived under them. All earthworms in the glaciated region were introduced and are non-native. They are highly destructive of our forests. Combine those with deer overpopulation and it’s a one-two punch.

Ive come across some spots in bc that are still like that. In Alberta there is a pine duff that not much can survive. As much as i love our forests, i see pine a bit negatively.

Very admirable, any vids of that forest?

Thanks very much, that's quite encouraging! There are more on the burner, but it'll take time to complete them. Do you have any particular suggestions for topics that would interest you? -Ray

@@NewEnglandForests , holy cow there are so many topics that come to mind I could suggest hundreds of them. How about a video about moths and all the different species that inhabit the North East? Or mushrooms,, lichens and mosses? Or identifying salamander species? The Northeast forests are so full of life and I don't think average citizens have any idea about what really goes on in them year to year. I am in my late 50's and have been across the USA more than once, there is NOTHING comparable to the North East from Maine down through the Appalachians.

Those are excellent suggestions. In fact, mushrooms and the bryophytes (lichens, mosses, etc) have been on my list for a while. Salamanders are another good subject too. Thanks for the ideas, I'll work on them. And I agree with you about the region, I love it.

Hi David, thank you for your message. I think you're right about the awareness (or lack of it) of forest ecology. It does seem to be improving, but slowly. People seem to be generally in favor of protecting and preserving the natural environment. It's when something affects their own finances that things can go south. We're doing what we can to spread the word. You can help by encouraging others to watch. And yes, more films will be uploaded; they take a huge amount of time to produce, but at least two more are currently in the works. Thanks for watching! -Ray

Thank you Richard, that's greatly appreciated. -Ray

They do improve soil health, but to do so they change its properties a lot. Our native plants aren't used to those properties yet, but give them a few thousand years and they'll be perfectly adapted.

Amen, chief.

If they survive that long through this stage.

Yes, once you become familiar with this earthworm damage, you quickly recognize it in many places.

Al, deer overpopulation certainly has a big impact on forest land, but the combination of large deer numbers and invasive worms is a double whammy that can be truly awful, opening the doors widely for invasive plants that neither find palatable. Not a good scenario.

I would think turkeys possums and a variety of wildlife would keep worm populations in check. Im not saying they do, i just wonder that they dont.

@@Oldguitar57 I was thinking the same thing. Worms benefit my garden with aeration, the birds eat worms, birds benefit gardens. Gardens benefit humans. Besides if every square inch in of the forest floor grew a tree, the forest wouldn't be healthy. Disease would spread easier, and wildfires would be hard to control. Beavers chew down trees, make dams and flood the forest floor. You can't win.

The invasive earthworms are not everywhere (yet). On their own, they would spread very slowly. However, over the last few centuries, we have spread them widely, in a number of ways... their tiny eggs cling to tires and shoes, and get dispersed that way. We spread them by moving soil and other things (eg, nursery stock) from one place to another, and we lose or discard fishing worms all over the place. The past widespread practice of moving topsoil from abandoned farms and spreading it somewhere else (eg, new home developments) undoubtedly moved worms too. There are some forest and/or soil types they don't do well in, so those places may remain less impacted. But once you know how to detect their presence by their castings and tunnel holes, you'll be able to notice them much more. You can roll over some logs or stones here and there to see if there are worms under them. I tend to notice their presence more along the edges of roads and trails in forests. But in some areas, they are really plentiful, and highly destructive.

Exactly because the worms are helping not hurting.

That is incorrect. Here in northern forests that had been glaciated, earthworms have been introduced from Europe and Asia, and where they are present they’re highly destructive. They are not found everywhere in these forests yet (thankfully), but where they are, the destruction is very evident. There’s simply no question about that. I too was always under the impression that earthworms are beneficial (and in a garden they likely are), but it’s clear that they are quite the opposite here in our northern forests.

@@NewEnglandForests me and my neighbors will continue to have earthworms and our forest will continue to thrive along with the excess deer free fertilizer cant beat it.

Yes, you no doubt will continue to have worms, and so will we because no one knows how to eliminate them from our forests, sadly. But such is life. Enjoy your garden!

Hello Lukas, I don't know if worms are a problem where you are, but they are not a problem in North America south of where the last glacier covered the land. The worms there are native, and the forests evolved with them. In the northern states of the USA that were glaciated, no worms survived under the ice, so when the glacier melted there were no worms present when the forest returned. Those that are now present have been introduced and are not native, so the forests did not evolve in their presence. Those worms, as you saw in the film, are highly destructive to the forest floor, and thus, the forest. Whether the conditions you describe in Lithuania are caused by worms or not, I don't know. But it would be interesting to find out. If you do, please let us know.

@@NewEnglandForests It's actually very interesting. Part of europe also was glaciated, but why did they returned to north after glacier moved away and why worms of south america havent, probably because they are different species of worms but still it is strange. Worms are actually not a problem anywhere here in Europe. What I wanted to say that there is a very big variety of tree species in America and maybe the abundance of worms and thick layer of leaves created that biodiversity it. Oh and I also want to ask, do worms in south america also leave land almost without a cover with only leaves from the last year? What would happen if worms would disappear from south america?

The native worms of the southern states in North America have not migrated to the northern states because they advance very slowly on their own, maybe only yards (meters) per year. The non-native worms that are here were first accidentally introduced from Europe by early settlers when they dumped soil used as ballast in their ships. Since then, more European and Asian worms have been brought in by various means, such as by the importation of nursery plants, and so on. I don't believe that the native worms in the southern states are a problem there, and don't destroy the forest floor there. They have evolved with those forests over many thousands or millions of years.

@@NewEnglandForests how have the non native earthworms been affecting unglaciated forests? Down here in Missouri, the forests were never glaciated

As far as I know, non-native worms can also be a problem in unglaciated forests. Eg, the Asian jumping worm is seriously damaging forest leaf litter in the Smokies.

In a garden plot, maybe. But in the forest, the worms completely eat the duff layer, which is where most plants germinate seeds and develop their first tiny roots. The layer is completely destroyed, leaving bare ground, sometimes with nutrients hauled too deep below the surface. The worms even eat the fine roots of existing plants, including tree seedlings. Very few plant species are left unaffected, and few can then grow there. It's a disaster; once you become aware of it, you can recognize where these worms are at work, often with a stark line of demarcation at the "front lines", as shown in the film.

@@NewEnglandForests Thanks for your reply! This is a wonderful series!!! So have the southern/european/asian forests that never had glaciers just co-evolve with the worms?

Yes, that’s the difference.

There is nothing that can be done about the worms that are in the forests at this point. They're disastrous. The only consolation is that they spread slowly on their own. But we inadvertently spread them (often via their eggs) far and wide in tire and boot treads; by dumping fishing bait and discarded plant material; and during logging operations, etc, etc.

Which other forests are you referring to?

@@NewEnglandForests kelp forests, look up cashes ledge in the gulf of Maine, of course the suggestion was kind of empty considering there is scarcely any left here anyway but still a worthy thing to look into even if its virtually impossible to actually make a documentary on like the 5 square feet of inshore kelp forest left in New England. Still though an interesting subject.

Oh, ok ... that's beyond my capabilities.

@@NewEnglandForests I know but still a cool subject

Native earthworms evolved with the plants in their habitat, and are "in balance" with their environment; they have relatively low populations that are kept under control by mechanisms that are not well understood, or known at all. But whatever that mechanism is, it doesn't seem to be in place when earthworms are introduced to a new location that has no worms. Like other invasives, they just "go wild" in their new habitat, with little or no control on their numbers.

Predators rarely are able to eliminate a prey species. Although many animals eat earthworms, the worms reproduce in numbers, and are able to avoid predation effectively enough to increase their population. There is no known way to get rid of them in our forests.

Animals havent had them as a dish in a long time either. Many animals are specialized to their food source and adapted to seek it out.

I thought that too, but they jump so fast and might get away.

Native earthworms evolved with the plants in their habitat, and are "in balance" with their environment; they have relatively low populations that are kept under control by mechanisms that are not well understood, or known at all. But whatever that mechanism is, it doesn't seem to be in place when earthworms are introduced to a new location that has no worms. Like other invasives, they just "go wild" in their new habitat, with little or no control on their numbers.

Yeah that must be the root cause, as earthworms can coexist perfectly fine with forests literally everywhere else in the world, Europe, Asia, even southern north America. In order for this problem to occur these earthworms must be present in plague numbers, maybe it's because it's missing the animals like hedgehogs from Europe/Asia and armadillos from further south.

There are already reports of non-native land planarians being found here, but it remains to be seen what effects they will have, good or bad. Introducing non-native species to an area is generally not a wise practice, possibly leading to catastrophic results. That’s exactly what’s happening here with the worms.

Hi Eli... mineral soil is not organic because it’s not composed of plant and animal matter; it’s fragments of rock such as sand and gravel, below the organic humus topsoil.

Josh, it can be pretty discouraging, can’t it? Our forests are going to be different than they are now, I believe. It will likely take a long, long time for things to stabilize. Globalization has wreaked havoc on our forests, and they probably will never be the same again. And I’m sure we’ll try to manage our way out of it, which will just further complicate things.

Hi Christopher, Like you, I always had understood worms were beneficial too. But in the northern areas of the country that were glaciated, no worms survived (if they had been here prior) the glaciers, so forests that recolonized this region evolved without worms. The only worms here are non-native, and are very destructive of the forest floor duff layer, which is the primary rooting zone of most plants and trees. What survives is dependent on the number of worms present and the degree of damage they've done so far. As you saw in the film, some areas are virtually totally devoid of plant growth. Other areas are affected to a lesser degree (so far anyway). This is a really serious problem for our northern forests; the only good news is that worms spread slowly on their own. However, we continue to spread them, either inadvertently or purposely. That's bad news. But you need not take my word for it... you'll find more info on the web about this problem.

New England Forests yes where I live the forests are loaded with the "Asian jumping worm" The duff layer has been replaced by a layer of crumbly coffee grounds looking dirt covered only some new leaves and a few ferns( and in some years tons of garlic mustard). The understory consists of thickets of euonymus and Japanese barberry. There are groves of white pine that I walked through easily when I was younger that are filled with man high tangles of barberry that the deer even bother to make trails through

Yes- actually, it likely started with the first boatloads of settlers arriving here in the 1600's. They used soil for ballast in ships' holds, and dumped it upon arrival here; no doubt it contained worms or eggs. And we've no doubt been importing them ever since, in various ways.

@@NewEnglandForests so basically, stop importing worms

@@everettduncan7543 Kind of hard now that people are breeding them within the country. Thanks worm farms.

Prescribed burning isn't done, to my knowledge, in forests of New England, and probably not in any northern forests. Exceptions to that might possibly be burning of slash piles after logging. Burning is done to maintain some grasslands, and is done in the south and perhaps west. Small natural fires do occur in northern forests, but usually don't do great damage, and may be beneficial. In New England, older, unmanaged forests tend to be moist enough to preclude big fires. The earthworms are an entirely different story though. Not good.

@@NewEnglandForests I was thinking more historically. My understanding is that Indians in the north-east were pretty rigourous users of precribed burning.

Yes, there's good evidence they burned the understory in areas where their populations were higher, to promote nut-bearing trees, and berry-producing shrubs; and to make hunting easier, etc. But that likely occurred along the coast of New England, and along river bottoms that they frequented. I don't think that practice occurred in upland areas much. If you haven't watched it yet, see our "Lost Forests of New England" film on this channel; that topic is covered.

@@NewEnglandForests Thanks, I'll give it a look.

Hi Ryan... I’m not aware of any sites that have recovered from non-native earthworms. I don’t know how that would happen. Either the worms would have to no longer be present, or the forest would have to evolve and adapt to their presence, which will likely take many, many years (hundreds? thousands?). I think the second scenario is what will happen, but the forests will most probably look a lot different than they have in the past.

@@NewEnglandForests Birds eat worms, don't they? I see the Robin eating worms in my front yard. This is quite a sad story.

Yes, many things eat worms. But they cannot and will never eliminate them. There is no known way to get rid of them, so all we can do is try to not spread them or their tiny eggs into forest interiors (on tires, boots, etc).

@@NewEnglandForests I can see loggers, road builders, and ATV riders cleaning their equipment regularly....right. And elected partisan politicians will never do what is needed. I study invasive plants...the situation is really, really bad, and we need a LOT more research and people willing to be stewards with knowledgeable skills willing to do the work. I work at helping with this, but am not sure where to find any kind of positive narrative or hope...without that they go off to find something more "possible" (easier).

Ahhh, Ruler- - such an interesting question. But alas, we do have native birds that eat worms.. the robin and woodcock come to mind. And moles eat them too. Sadly though, predator species virtually never are able to eliminate their prey species, which would ultimately be self defeating. Beyond that though, how would one go about training wildlife to eat worms? As of now, we have no known way to control or eliminate these highly destructive worms. This highlights one of the big problems in our tinkering with nature under the guise of “managing” it. We lack the knowledge, ability, and wisdom to manage nature in any long term beneficial way. We cause large scale problems with our introductions of harmful (usually non-native) species, and then compound them by further “management“ and remediation efforts. All this is what leads many of us to realize just how crucial it is to preserve what little natural, old growth forest we have left, and to dedicate much more forest land to be preserved forever as unmanaged wildlands. We’ve gone waayyy too far exploiting natural ecosystems.

​@@NewEnglandForests Why would it be self-defeating? If you think about it like a person and saw a home on fire would you just watch it burn the house and the people alive? Yes, the house and people will never be the same but at least try to minimize the damage. As for training the wildlife, step one, seek natural predators of worms in that exact location (1 mile radius). Step two, introduce small feeders for the nearby birds and moles or whatever species will be a natural predator. The small feeders will be filled store bought food (for that animal). Step three, introduce big feeders that will act as a tray to put the worms in that are collected from the ground. The big tray feeders will be placed near the small feeders. Step four, profit? Listen I don’t know if it will work, but it’s a thought. You’re looking at “managing” this problem from a negative context. If your wife or kids were shot and injured and a person had your same frame of mind of let’s not help “manage” this person life lets preserve the existing life not threatened/injured, you know, because it would be self-defeating to save your family’s life when everyone dies anyways. But I don’t know maybe you’re right let’s not do anything. We should preserve the old natural forest. But, in your last paragraph wouldn’t that be “managing”. Let’s try to come up with solutions. But I get I know about the blight fungus almost taking out the chestnut trees. So I’m not talking about introducing nonnative species that can kill 4 billion trees. I’m thinking of trying the use the current population of native species of that specific forest to minimize the damage.

The "self-defeating" comment refers to the fact that if a predator species eliminates its prey species, it then no longer has food. Nature doesn't work that way; when prey levels drop, the predator either must have other food sources, or its reproduction (and therefore population level) drops as well. In a way, the prey controls the predator as much as the predator may control the prey. Population levels of some species are often cyclical, with highs and crashes; that's particularly true for predator species that specialize in one prey species. I think we can rest assured that there are animals out there that are eating worms; however, they'll never be able to eradicate them (particularly when you consider that the worms spend most of their time in/under the soil). And as long as they aren't eradicated, they'll spread and continue to damage the forests. The forests are going to change in the worms' presence, and in the long term (centuries or millenia?), will evolve and adapt to their presence. The forests will most likely not look like they do now. Re management: I'm not suggesting that we do nothing; what I'm saying is, we must be very careful in our decisions, because we've inadvertently brought many of these problems on ourselves through well-intentioned actions. Today, with globalization, pathogens and non-native, invasive species are spread with lightning speed across the planet. The effects are really disturbing. It's not like trying to decide if we should save a family from a burning house; it's more like, do we try to eliminate all fire (or all houses) because houses are burning down? It's a really big deal, and our management decisions will have unforeseen consequences that keep snowballing. I don't have the answers, only the warning. Lastly, preserving our natural remnant old growth forests is not active management, it's the lack of management actions. They're the only forests that have any semblance of nature's full control; sadly, they're a pitifully small percentage of our forest land. But they serve as the last repository of the genetic material that produced the most spectacular temperate forests on earth. What fools we'd be to not preserve them. Don't misunderstand... I realize you're seeking a solution, and that's a good thing. I merely took the opportunity to pontificate; please forgive that.

@@Rulerofwolves_ I have a strange little experiment of converting a 100 year old "lawn" to a managed native grassland. I noticed across the street in a (much more but not very) native area, dozens of tree species germinate. Because this cannot be done by machine (selection for natives that have survived in the lawn all along, or doing this without disturbing the soil) I weed out MASSIVE amounts of invasive biomass. Inadvertently I created a "worm trap"...I used EDPM (high quality rubber pond liner) to cover parts of the lawn as part of a series of experiments. I was piling my weeds on the top to cook them back into nutrients to add back to the soil. These piles tend to be huge, and wet on the bottom...I have to turn them often to make them crispy and safe to put back into the soil. The worms came to me...and I began to toss any (also non-native) slugs I found there as well...both help break things down faster...and I come along, scoop them up. and feed them to my wild trout. My rewards (so far) are discovering that invasive lawn weeds suppress others, which simply germinate and happily take their place. But after about the third (ugh) weeding this year, I started getting little native mushrooms and even an orchid (which was leveled by one of the slugs), so there is hope, but no one would ever do this...it would be too expensive. The shrine of convenience we live in is too large. Like the Hotel California we can enter but not seem too leave. :/ But what made me write to you, is that the robins have figured all this out...when it rains the tarp gets too wet, and the worms come out...the robin waits for them. Your thought is innovative and creative. It is super hard to study "systems" even our basic science hypothesis/experiment/reduce all variables and compare with a control model is not really up to the task, and when we deviate from it (using observation of systems instead) we are quickly condemned.

Wolf ruler: I wonder what would happen if you filled the forests with chickens? And I mean thousands and thousands of them. And when they finished eating all the worms and grubs and grasshoppers...we have a big chicken round up and eat them. The chickens get to have a great life of free ranging, the coyotes and wolves and bears get to eat chicken here and there...

Well, how do you feel about attractive, slim, shiny green beetles? They seem friendly enough too. Yet the emerald ash borer is wiping out all our ash trees; billions of them already killed. It really is disheartening, isn’t it?

yikes, triggered much? Japanese beetles and the emerald ash borers are CLEARLY dangerous invasive species. Me and %99 percent of the folks watching and enjoying your fantastic videos had no idea that the earthworm were either invasive or harmful at all anywhere. That is a brand new thought to most of is viewing this. That is all i was trying to convey.

Sorry, didn't mean for that to sound snippy, just meant to offer another "friendly" looking species that some might be surprised to learn is destructive. I was as surprised as you to learn that the worms don't belong here, and that they're destructive. You can find more info if you search for "invasive earthworms".

no prob at all... I wonder why its more of an issue in northern forests?

Wherever the last glaciers covered the earth with thousands of feet of ice for thousands of years, nothing survived under them, so no worms were there. The forests that returned as glaciers receded evolved without worms. That includes the northern tier of the USA. Now, the only worms present there are introduced, non-native, invasive worms.

I was very surprised to learn about the earthworm damage too, having always heard how beneficial they were. But you can tell your friend to search the web for "invasive earthworms" and he'll find plenty of information about them. Dr Lee Frelich, Director of the University of Minnesota Center for Forest Ecology, is an expert on the subject; he reviewed the film for accuracy.

I try to keep an open mind and I did watch the whole video. But this is just nonsense. When the Indians would burn the forest floor for better hunting and other things it left the floor bare. Did the forest suffer? no it got better. there are lots of reasons why the spot he showed in video was thin leaves. Drought, small leaf tree species. The worms don't eat living things so saying they eat tree root is false. They don't even eat dead leaves. The bacteria break the leaves down then worms consume whats left. I've seen scrappy forest with lots of worms be brought back to life and are thriving to date with good management practices. This idea is total nonsense. old post but reading these comments I'm sorry I couldn't hold my tongue or finger from typing anymore lol.

Sorry, but you are incorrect. It is a well established fact... northern regions that were glaciated have no native earthworms. Those that have been introduced (European and Asian) are highly destructive to our forest duff layer, and nearly all the vegetation dependent on it. There are many, many sites where there is a clear demarcation between soil that contains these worms and adjacent soil that does not (yet) harbor them. They reduce the duff layer to virtually nothing, leaving just exposed mineral soil and their castings. You don't have to take my word for it, just do a web search for "invasive earthworms".

@@NewEnglandForests sorry but no I'm not. There's a ton of misinformation on the web also youtube. When worms leave their castings they are loaded with beneficial bacteria and fungus. I use them all the time around my trees and garden and both are thriving. Earthworms cause damage to forest? See my woods and others around me and you won't be saying that. Again complete nonsense.

Worms are fine in a garden because a garden is not dependent on a duff layer, whereas a forest is. The forest floor duff layer is the primary rooting zone for virtually all forest plants, including trees. Earthworms most certainly do eat dead leaves. That’s why they’re so effective at breaking down a compost pile. Each autumn I put 4 to 5 feet of dead leaves on my compost pile, and they’re nearly entirely gone by the following summer. The same thing happens on the forest floor, but more completely because the year’s fallen leaves are not several feet deep. This does not apply farther south in the USA where glaciers did not occur, and forests evolved with worms present.

There are no native earthworm species where the last glaciers had covered the ground. Nothing had survived under them. The forests that grew as the glaciers retreated never had worms in them, so have not adapted to their presence.