Union Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav has categorically stated that it is "absolutely wrong" to conclude that mining is now permitted across all landforms below 100 metres in height in the ecologically sensitive Aravali range. The clarification comes amid concerns raised by opposition parties and environmentalists following the Supreme Court's recent acceptance of a uniform, Centre-backed definition for the Aravali Hills and Ranges.
Breaking Down the Numbers: A Tiny Fraction Open for Mining
On Sunday, Minister Yadav took to social media platform X to provide detailed data, aiming to quell the growing apprehension. He emphasized that only 0.19% of the total 1.44 lakh square kilometre area of the Aravali range can be considered eligible for mining activities. "The rest of the Aravali is protected and secure," he asserted in his post.
He further broke down the existing mining footprint, noting that only a minuscule area is under permitted mining leases. Within this already small percentage, the distribution is heavily skewed: nearly 90% of the mining activity is confined to Rajasthan, followed by approximately 9% in Gujarat and about 1% in Haryana. He confirmed that no mining activity is permitted in Delhi.
What the New Uniform Definition Actually Means
The minister provided a detailed explanation of the definition, which was a key point of contention. He clarified that the Aravali range is defined as all landforms existing within 500 metres of two adjoining hills with a height of 100 metres or more. Crucially, all landforms within this 500-metre zone are excluded from being considered for mining leases, regardless of their individual height or slope.
Yadav elaborated on this during a media interaction on the sidelines of a National Tiger Conservation Authority meeting in Sundarbans. He stressed that all landforms enclosed within the lowest binding contour encircling hills of 100 metres or more are also excluded for mining lease purposes. "By defining Aravalli Hills as any landform rising 100 metres or more above local relief, along with their supporting slopes, the entire ecological unit is protected," his ministry later explained. This approach is designed to prevent the piecemeal exploitation of slopes and foothills critical for soil stability, water recharge, and vegetation.
Political Backlash and the Call to Stop 'Confusion'
The issue had sparked significant political debate. During the recent winter session of Parliament, opposition parties raised alarms, claiming the new definition would strip protection from most of the Aravali range. Following the Supreme Court's November order accepting the definition, Congress general secretary and former environment minister Jairam Ramesh called it a "severe blow" to the ecosystem.
Ramesh had argued that the definition, while meant to restrict mining, would result in 90% of the Aravali Hills not being counted as Aravali anymore, leading to grave environmental consequences. Former Rajasthan Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot also criticized the move, blaming the Centre for pushing the uniform definition.
In his rebuttal, Minister Yadav appealed to everyone to "stop spreading confusion." He pointed out that the Rajasthan government has been following a similar criterion since 2006. His ministry stated that all Aravali range states and union territories agreed during deliberations to adopt the uniform criterion of "100 metres above local relief" for regulating mining, making the existing Rajasthan practice more objective and transparent across the region.
