By the time Georgia House Speaker John Burns and Lt. Gov. Burt Jones gaveled out the 2024 session of the General Assembly in the wee hours of Friday morning, the Legislature had scrambled to pass dozens of bills dealing with elections, illegal immigration and much more.
What didn’t pass? Measures that would pause or limit mining near the Okefenokee Swamp, as an Alabama company closes in on securing permits to dig for titanium in the mineral-rich sand dunes on the refuge’s eastern rim.
But the session’s close doesn’t mean efforts to pump the brakes on the mine are over. In fact, the coming weeks and months will be critical to the fate of the project and the swamp next door, as pressure on state leaders grows.
Here’s what you need to know.
Mining pause fizzles
A bill that would have paused permitting of new mines like the one Alabama-based Twin Pines Minerals wants to develop on the swamp’s doorstep cleared the Georgia House earlier this week. But the measure — SB 132 — was not brought to the Senate floor for a vote on the session’s final day.
The legislation would not have stopped the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) from issuing permits to Alabama-based Twin Pines Minerals for the 582-acre mine the company wants to develop. But SB 132 would have prevented EPD from considering new permits for “dragline” mining until mid-2027. Dragline mining is the same technique Twin Pines wants to use, and the measure could have hampered its expansion plans.
The bill’s backers, which included Burns and a few environmental groups, had pitched the legislation as a compromise that could buy time to protect the Okefenokee, which is set to be nominated as a World Heritage site.
Credit: HYOSUB SHIN / AJC
Credit: HYOSUB SHIN / AJC
Ultimately, the bill’s fate was sealed by a few GOP senators who opposed the measure. In the session’s waning hours, it went without a vote, as the chamber moved to swiftly pass other bills that were more palatable to its Republican majority.
Another, broader mining bill that has appeared to have bipartisan support from more than half of the House also did not get a vote.
“This is now the third year in a row legislators have failed to pass a bill that would offer a meaningful way to protect the Okefenokee from the mining threat,” said Megan Huynh, a senior attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center.
Pressure on Kemp
As Twin Pines’ plans have progressed, Gov. Brian Kemp has mostly stayed quiet about the project. But with the mine on the cusp of becoming reality, environmentalists and other politicians, including Georgia Sen. Jon Ossoff, are ratcheting up pressure on Kemp to step in to halt the project.
Ossoff, who visited the swamp with Interior Secretary Deb Haaland in 2022 and has repeatedly spoken out against Twin Pines, said in a statement that the risk of the mining near the refuge is too great.
Credit: U.S. Department of the Interior
Credit: U.S. Department of the Interior
“This isn’t a close call,” Ossoff said. “Local opponents, conservationists, outdoor enthusiasts, scientists, and the Fish and Wildlife Service have repeatedly warned the governor of the risks. Now, he needs to stop this thing in its tracks and save the Okefenokee.”
A request for comment on whether Kemp supports or opposes the mine was not immediately returned by his office.
Other mining opponents hope that the federal government, which has been sidelined from permitting the mine, could also act to impede Twin Pines.
In January, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Acting Regional Director Mike Oetker sent a letter to EPD Director Jeff Cown reserving federal rights to the water that fills the Okefenokee. Oetker wrote the agency is “concerned that the issuance of a permit at this juncture would not preserve sufficient water” for the refuge.
Credit: Arvin Temkar/AJC
Credit: Arvin Temkar/AJC
EPD spokeswoman Sara Lips previously confirmed that Cown and Oetker met on Feb. 12 to discuss the issue and that EPD is evaluating the letter.
Water rights claims like the one FWS made are more common in the Western U.S., where water is scarcer and rights are dictated by a complex priority system that often dates back centuries.
Still, experts say the Okefenokee’s reserved water rights were established when the federal government created the refuge in 1937, though the extent of them remains up for debate. Huynh said the Okefenokee is legally entitled to as much water as needed to support its primary purposes as a refuge and wilderness area.
“The spirit of rules like this are to preserve public lands for all of us ... and what Twin Pines is proposing could jeopardize the very reason the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge is a refuge in the first place,” Huynh added.
What’s next
In the meantime, Huynh and others said all eyes will be fixed on EPD, which is in charge of permitting the proposed mine.
EPD released draft permits for Twin Pines’ project last month and the period for public comment on those closes April 9. The agency has said it will evaluate comments it receives and respond to technical feedback, but in theory, EPD could issue final permits any time after April 9.
EPD did not immediately respond to a question about the number of comments it has received so far.
Twin Pines’ and its environmental consultants have repeatedly said the mine won’t harm the Okefenokee. EPD has mostly concurred with their assessment. But some influential scientists have already submitted feedback raising questions about their conclusions, according to memos shared with The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
Credit: TNS
Credit: TNS
Rhett Jackson, a hydrologist at UGA, submitted new comments to EPD reiterating his analysis that Twin Pines’ groundwater withdrawals from the underlying aquifers will increase the occurrence of drought in the swamp and low flow days on the St. Marys River.
Kristen Ritter Rivera, a former EPD employee who previously served on the State Board of Professional Geologists as a Kemp appointee, also submitted comments critical of the company and the modeling it used to evaluate the mine’s impact.
In her memo, Rivera argued that the mine will lower water levels in the swamp and that the company’s violations of state law during its exploratory drilling on the mine site were “egregious.” Earlier this year, Twin Pines was fined $20,000 by EPD for drilling soil samples without the oversight of a professional geologist, or posting the necessary bond to do the work. The company has denied any wrongdoing.
Rivera said the violations raise questions about the integrity of the data the company collected and EPD has relied on, and called for an independent panel to review the models.
