I’ve spent my life working on Georgia forestland. Though much of my work now happens behind a desk, I still grade roads, harrow firebreaks, conduct controlled burns and fight wildfires.
Every time I’m out in the woods, I’m reminded how fragile it all is. Forests don’t take care of themselves — they survive because someone shows up, year after year, with care, commitment and the freedom to make long-term decisions.
The Conservation Fund’s purchase of the proposed Twin Pines mine site near the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge may have resolved one local debate. But I hope it sparks a broader conversation about the growing economic challenges of owning forestland. These lands provide tremendous public value, while becoming increasingly unsustainable for private landowners to maintain.
More than 90% of Georgia’s forests are privately owned. That means the future of clean water, wildlife habitat, outdoor recreation, and thousands of rural jobs depends on decisions made not by government agencies, but by individuals and families — driven by values like stewardship, independence and legacy. But those values are under growing strain.
Other states have more favorable tax environments
Credit: hand
Credit: hand
Georgia makes it harder to own and keep forestland than nearly any other state in the region. Timber here is taxed at 100% of its fair market value at harvest — making it the only asset in the state taxed at full value — while all other real property is assessed at roughly 40%.
Alabama uses a per-ton tax, a simpler and more predictable system. Florida, South Carolina and Mississippi impose no severance tax at all. And even with Georgia’s conservation-use property tax programs, enrolled forestland still faces significantly higher taxes than comparable land in neighboring states.
At the same time, the environmental community wants to see these lands remain forested and undeveloped. But as ownership costs climb, even committed landowners are forced to consider options they’d rather avoid — selling, subdividing or converting forestland. And every acre lost means degraded water quality, fragmented habitat and the erosion of a rural way of life that has shaped Georgia for generations.
There is a desperate cry from forestland owners across the country for a carrot, not a stick, approach to conservation. We don’t need more bans or restrictive laws. What we need are real, effective incentives that make it economically feasible to keep forestland intact and undeveloped.
If the public truly values the benefits it receives from privately owned forests, it must also recognize these come at a cost — borne, without compensation, by landowners. Without practical ways to support continued private ownership, we risk more unnecessary conflict between landowners, conservationists and the public. It’s critical to find solutions that respect ownership while protecting public benefits.
Rural communities aren’t against conservation; they want fairness
Most landowners I know care deeply about their land. But care alone won’t keep forests standing. Good stewardship must be supported by policy — not pressure or protest, but freedom, fairness and practical tools that work.
We believe in legacy, not litigation. In partnership, not pressure. In stewardship, not mandates. Georgia has an opportunity to lead. That begins with updating the timber severance tax to align with how other property is assessed. CUVA and FLPA should be modernized to better serve family-owned and smaller tracts. And we should explore new tools — like reforestation tax credits, water protection incentives and long-term tax stability. These aren’t giveaways or loopholes. They’re thoughtful, limited-government solutions that protect forests while respecting those who manage them.
We also need a more objective, science-based and consistent process for evaluating land-use proposals, whether they involve development or something in between. I strongly believe in private property rights and in assessing future projects with objectivity, not public pressure.
During the Twin Pines permitting debate, I didn’t advocate for the project. I advocated for the right to apply and for the state to make a science-based, transparent decision. That nuance was often lost in some media coverage that reduced a call for fairness into a false narrative of support. In most interviews and articles, it described me as supporting the mine, when in fact I was supporting a fair and honest process.
That kind of framing drives a wedge between rural communities and the broader conservation movement. It erodes trust in the conversations we need to have. It felt like David vs. Goliath: a few local landowners asking for objectivity up against national organizations with deep pockets and media reach. The goal wasn’t to guarantee approval — it was to ensure an honest, science-based process. That’s all any landowner or community should expect.
As one neighboring landowner told me, “I love my trees, but love alone doesn’t pay the tax bill.” That’s the quiet, often painful truth behind many decisions being made today.
I urge lawmakers to collaborate with — not against — forest landowners to develop sustainable, workable solutions that support private ownership while respecting property rights. We don’t need more burdens. We need real partnership, practical incentives and a commitment to listening. Without it, we risk losing not just trees, but a way of life that sustains families, communities and the character of rural Georgia.
Joseph “Drew” Jones is the District 4 Charlton County commissioner. He is a pharmacist, tree farmer and currently employed by Toledo Manufacturing Co. and WC and WC Hopkins and Sons, LLLP, as a forest land manager.
About the Author
Keep Reading
The Latest
Featured
