OPINION: The Latest Environmental Witch Hunt: Smith River Lily Bulb Farmers in the Crosshairs

Commentary and Opinion by Samuel Strait

There is an old adage: if you want to know something about farming, ask a farmer. Recently, there has been much ado about nothing when activists have come before various of the County’s boards and commissions to claim human activities are “poisoning the waters of the Smith River!” The most recent “evil doers” are the lily bulb farmers of the Smith River estuary.

First, it was the proposed highway safety construction on 199 and 197, where a dozen or more spots were to be realigned to prevent further loss of life and serious injury. A decade and a half later—after lawfare by environmentalists to halt the projects and the loss of multiple human lives—the court found the lawsuit without merit.

Next up was the claim by Smith River Alliance’s Grant Werschkull that one-hundred-year-old mine tailings were poisoning the Smith River’s North Fork with “copper and other toxic materials.” This statement led to concerns both Crescent City and Smith River water supplies were unfit for human consumption. Unfortunately for Mr. Werschkull, routine water testing by both Crescent City and Smith River found the statement to be untrue.

Naturally, the eco-caitiffs in Del Norte County—obsessed with any and all human activities that conflict with their fixation on the Smith River being free of potential human contamination—needed a new target. Frustrated by their lack of success, the lily bulb farmers have recently become their next bull’s-eye for elimination.

Copper contamination is the eco-caitiffs’ go-to rationale for shutting down any human activity close to the Smith River. The problem thus far is the fact copper is quite common in Del Norte and Curry counties. Copper exists in sufficient quantities throughout the region to have attracted copper mining companies. Surface waters inevitably show resulting levels of copper every time there is substantial rainfall, making it extremely difficult to precisely identify sources of the copper—and an ideal substance to claim foul for many human activities. Pot farming, anyone? Highway herbicide containment for weeds?

Passioned appeals by a local activist at the Board of Supervisors and the Crescent City Harbor Board—of renewed claims of Smith River “water contamination” by lily bulb farmers—led to no action by either board. A similar event was undertaken at a local meeting of the North Coast Regional Water Board, featuring much of the same rhetoric and emotional appeals to “do something” about lily bulb farming.

The bottom line: the Smith River water is still fit for human consumption despite all the noise. But fish are now the population most affected, according to the local environmental mob. The farmers MUST change how they protect their crops without chemicals and adopt more “fish-friendly” farming practices. Time to ask a farmer.

After spending an hour with Matt and Carolyn Westbrook at Palmer Westbrook Farms, a picture of quiet competence emerged—detailing their efforts to remain environmentally friendly and yet economically practical. Lily bulb farming is their livelihood and returns about $4 million dollars of economic activity to the county. They follow accepted farming practices of crop rotation, barrier filtration crops surrounding the treated lily bulb fields, and great care when treating their bulbs with pesticides. This has resulted in a vast reduction in potential chemical contamination and has led to surface water collection reporting that surface water DOES NOT REPRESENT A HAZARD TO HUMAN HEALTH.

Lily bulb farms—three in total—represent about $10 to $12 million dollars of direct economic benefit to Del Norte County, and about $20 to $24 million in total economic impact every year. While claims persist that the bulb farms are responsible for slightly above-EPA-standard contamination of surface water (one to four parts per billion, not million), there has yet to be any evidence of increased effect on human health in the region surrounding the farms—nor any conclusive evidence of impact on local fish populations.

Finally, twenty years of research looking for an acceptable alternative to using chemicals to prevent pest infestations have yielded NO successful alternative to current farming practices. Surface waters of the Smith River remain "FIT FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION". No evidence of increased health-related issues exists in the Smith River estuary. And no conclusive evidence shows fish populations have declined as a result of lily bulb farming.

So, the question becomes: is this yet another “much ado about nothing?” Is this obsession over reality by local—and even out-of-area—environmentalists something to be concerned about? Perhaps not.

November 17, 2025