Toledo Manufacturing Defends Position on Okefenokee Mining

Company disputes claims about its role in proposed titanium dioxide mining near wildlife refuge

Published on Mar. 9, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

Toledo Manufacturing, a major landowner in Charlton County, Georgia, has issued a rebuttal to a columnist's claims about the company's stance on proposed mining near the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge. The company asserts it has not advocated for any mining permits and instead has called for objective, science-based decision-making by regulatory agencies.

Why it matters

The debate over mining near the Okefenokee Refuge has become a contentious political issue, with conservation groups pushing for a legislative ban and some local officials advocating for a more thorough regulatory review process. Toledo Manufacturing's response highlights the complexities involved and the need to balance environmental concerns with property rights and economic realities for private landowners.

The details

In a letter to the columnist, Drew Jones, who runs Toledo Manufacturing day-to-day, disputed several assertions made in previous columns. Jones stated the company has not advocated for any mining permits and instead has called for objective, science-based decision-making by regulatory agencies. He also said the company's property ownership adjacent to the proposed mining site does not equate to support for the project. Jones argued that complex hydrological and environmental questions should be resolved through empirical analysis, not political pressure from either side. He also noted the broader economic challenges facing private forestland owners, which he said the columnist has overlooked.

  • The letter from Toledo Manufacturing was sent in response to the columnist's recent articles on the Okefenokee mining issue.

The players

Toledo Manufacturing Company, Inc.

A major landowner in Charlton County, Georgia, owning 50,000 acres. The company has been involved in the debate over proposed titanium dioxide mining near the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge.

Drew Jones

The day-to-day operator of Toledo Manufacturing Company and the nephew-in-law of the company's president, Joe Hopkins.

Joe Hopkins

The president of Toledo Manufacturing Company, who is seen by supporters of a mining ban as having outsized political influence in the state.

Dick Yarbrough

A columnist who has written critically about the proposed mining near the Okefenokee Refuge and Toledo Manufacturing's role in the issue.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“To be clear at the outset, Toledo Manufacturing never advocated for Twin Pines Minerals to receive a permit, nor did we support mining absent rigorous, independent scientific review. We have consistently advocated for objective, science-based decision-making carried out by qualified regulatory agencies, free from political pressure, whether that pressure seeks to force approval or impose a blanket prohibition without evidence.”

— Drew Jones, Toledo Manufacturing Company, Inc. (timesenterprise.com)

“Property ownership adjacent to a proposed project does not equate to support for that project. Our position has been that decisions of this magnitude should be based on transparent studies conducted by credentialed experts without ideological or financial bias, not on reflexive opposition, campaign rhetoric or pressure from interest groups on either side of the issue.”

— Drew Jones, Toledo Manufacturing Company, Inc. (timesenterprise.com)

“Readers deserve accurate reporting based on facts, not narratives constructed without input from those most directly involved. We encourage coverage that reflects evidence, transparency, and the evolving nature of scientific research. If current or future studies demonstrate that mining in or near the Okefenokee poses unacceptable risks, then permits should not be issued. That conclusion should rest on evidence, not presumption.”

— Drew Jones, Toledo Manufacturing Company, Inc. (timesenterprise.com)

What’s next

The debate over mining near the Okefenokee Refuge is expected to continue, with both sides pushing for their preferred approach - a legislative ban or a more thorough regulatory review process. The outcome will likely depend on the findings of any future scientific studies on the potential environmental impacts.

The takeaway

This dispute highlights the complexities involved in balancing environmental concerns, property rights, and economic realities for private landowners. While the debate over mining near the Okefenokee Refuge remains heated, both sides agree that any decision should be based on objective, science-based analysis rather than political pressure or ideological agendas.