The state on the Okefenokee, and what comes next after a disappointing legislative session

The Okefenokee Swamp, the largest blackwater swamp in North America, which was at the center of attention for environmentalists this past legislative session, still does not have a certain future. 

The 2024 Georgia Legislative Session, which ended March 28, saw conservation groups like Georgia River Network continue the advocacy work spotlighted in their Georgia Rivers Gala to secure protections for the Okefenokee. The Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge is currently threatened by a proposed mining operation by Alabama company Twin Pines Minerals’, which experts say would disturb the hydrology of the swamp and destroy wildlife habitats.

House Bill (HB) 71, or The Okefenokee Protection Act, would have prohibited mining along some of the lands of the swamp’s eastern border and effectively stopped Twin Pines Minerals. The bill was sponsored by Rep. Darlene Taylor, a Republican from Thomasville, and despite strong support, was never brought to a vote. 

To the dismay of bill supporters, HB 71 never got a hearing in the House Natural Resources and Environment Committee, either.

The legislative fiasco saw a number of other bills get support and opposition from swamp advocates, too; HB 1338, for instance, proposed a three-year pause on mining permits but included what the Georgia River Network called “problematic language” that ultimately would limit judicial review for mining permits in the future. That bill never reached the House. 

SB 132, on the other hand, did find favor as a temporary solution with the Georgia River network after it carried the three-year pause but did not have the problematic language from HB 1338 — however, after passing the House, the bill was never brought to a vote in the Senate before the legislative session ended.

About 93 percent of the swamp is already protected under the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge (ONWR). The Twin Pines Mining permits that would affect the eastern border known as Trail Ridge are currently in a draft stage. 

The public comment period ended April 9, though it was originally scheduled to end on February 9 until public pressure extended it another 30 days for a total of 60 days. In 2023’s 60-day public comment period, the Mining Land Use Plan received over 78,000 total comments.

In early April, the Georgia River Network released a formal letter to the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD).

“As a significant stakeholder in the well-being of important Georgia natural resources, Georgia River Network urges EPD to deny the permits for this mine which threatens the integrity of the Okefenokee Swamp and the tourism, timber and farming-based economies that depend on a healthy, intact swamp ecosystem,” wrote the Georgia River Network in their letter.

The letter alleges that a demonstration mine, the Saunders Demonstration Mine, will threaten the health of the swamp, along with the health of the St. Marys River, which sits at a lower sea level than the swamp.

The mine is called a demonstration mine because it is being used to demonstrate that “heavy mineral sand mining can be accomplished in an environmentally sensitive area with negligible impact,” according to a slideshow that also showed public engagement sessions from Twin Pines Minerals on the mining controversy. A YouTube video from Twin Peak Minerals also shows the planned methods to safely mine near the swamp.

The Georgia River Network’s letter indicates in multiple instances, however, that the demonstration mine may not be indicative of what expanded mining efforts look like and that the demonstration mine may be nothing more than a PR move. The letter also addressed key issues that they have regarding permits:

• The Twin Pines “demo mine” does not demonstrate true impacts on the Okefenokee
• Surface mining rules are not followed, and failure to consider groundwater impacts on Okefenokee Swamp and St. Marys River
• Monitoring requirements inadequate to quantify impacts on Okefenokee and St. Marys River
• Additional study of the mining site for archaeological discoveries is needed; EPD should consult with the Muscogee (Creek) Nation and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Additionally, the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC) recently submitted their technical and legal comments to EPD on behalf of SELC and 52 other groups in opposition to the Twin Pines mine next to the Okefenokee, said a communications manager for SELC.

In that letter, the SELC and the other groups urged denial of Twin Pine Minerals’ permit requests, as “No permit application in Georgia history has drawn as much opposition as this one” and “even a perfectly operated mine would create an unacceptable risk to the Okefenokee.” The 96-page document outlines multiple instances in which it alleges Twin Pines Minerals has already acted out of accordance with local laws and regulations and that this would be indicative of what’s to come for the Okefenokee and surrounding environment and wildlife should the permits be granted.

Proponents of Okefenokee protection hope that the aforementioned letters, along with private citizens who wrote to Georgia EPD, will be enough to have EPD request changes to Twin Peak Minerals’ mining plan.