The climate crisis has increased the demands on Swedish forestry and given fuel to an already polarized debate concerning how Swedish forests should be managed and what constitutes sustainable forestry. Questions of ownership and who should have a say in the matter is at the center of this conflict. This essay examines the topic of ownership in the Swedish forest debate. The argumentation of stakeholders in the debate was analyzed to show which topoi contribute to the conflict and create inertia towards reaching mutual understanding. Thirty-nine opinion articles from Swedish news media, published between April and October 2021, were analyzed through a critical textual analysis. Two primary groupings among the debaters were found: those who argue to strengthen the rights of forest owners, and those who argue for more regulation or conservation. Identified topoi show that emotions and trust play a key role in the conflict. Ways of working with this and possibilities for discursive meeting places are discussed. Making explicit important values, clearly defining important terms, and focusing on the right subject matters are also suggested to enhance possibilities for mutual understanding.