Pulwama, Shopian, Budgam (Kashmir): Across the Union territory of Jammu and Kashmir, official records show thousands of seizures, hundreds of FIRs and substantial penalty recoveries related to illegal mining activities over the past roughly five years. Satellite-based surveillance has generated alerts of extensive extraction, while the National Green Tribunal (NGT) has also documented cases of environmental damage, especially to the Sukhnag, Doodh Ganga and Rambiara rivers.Yet there is still no single, publicly accessible chain of information connecting a mining permission to the precise site of extraction, the quantity removed, the machinery used, environmental approvals, transportation records and subsequent enforcement.Environmental campaigners argue that the problem of lack of transparency has worsened with the mechanisation of extraction – and that in itself became a bigger problem in the last five to six years.At the same time, the use of heavy machinery for mining, which is banned beyond permitted zones in Kashmir, has increased the scale, depth and speed of extraction.Earlier, environmental clearance proceedings concerning riverbed mining in J&K prohibited the use of heavy machinery such as JCBs, excavators and L&T hydraulic excavators in several riverbed-mining blocks. The J&K Expert Appraisal Committee (JKEAC), which grants environmental clearances, restricted them from disturbing watercourses during transportation of minor minerals.The result is that the physical structure of riverbeds in the Valley is steadily deteriorating, wearing out natural protections against adverse weather conditions and increasing the risk of ecological damage.Raja Muzaffar Bhat, chairman of the J&K Climate Action Group, said riverbed mining in Kashmir had traditionally been carried out manually, with comparatively little impact on rivers and streams. “But for the last five to six years, heavy machinery has been used on a large scale, which has caused massive destruction,” he told The Wire.Vasu Yadav, chairman of the J&K Pollution Control Committee, who also holds additional charge as director for environment in and member secretary of the Environmental Impact Assessment Authority, told The Wire that the regulatory framework constantly evolves to keep up with unauthorised extraction.“Guidelines for mining evolve keeping in view notifications issued by the government from time to time, court orders and feedback,” Yadav said. He said the primary objectives were “curbing illegal mining and adherence to environmental norms”.But the ground situation tells a different story. Several companies have carried out mechanised mining despite receiving leases or environmental clearances that banned it. At times, it has sparked public outcry against such firms.“When I saw mechanised extraction in my neighbourhood, I realised that the Doodh Ganga won’t live long and launched a campaign to have it stopped,” Bhat said.The Save Doodh Ganga campaign, one of many such in J&K to save waterbodies, was launched in 2021. Ultimately, the effort resulted in the NGT stopping mechanised riverbed mining along a substantial stretch of the waterbody in May 2024. But in many places, it was already too late.Around 2021, NKC Projects Pvt Ltd, a construction company from Haryana, was licensed to mine in the Shaliganga stream in Budgam district, said Bhat. The stream is a tributary of the Doodh Ganga. After Bhat went to the NGT citing the lack of a mandatory study and the fact that the area was already substantially depleted, it took another six months to halt the project.But, in 2022, the same company moved 30 kilometres away, to Sukhnag in the same district. Another petition by Bhat to NGT led to this work being shut down in January 2025.“But I cannot go to every place. People are sleeping, especially the educated people, who know the law,” Bhat said.The NGT recently visited the Sukhnag riverbed in Budgam and found significant environmental degradation on account of mining. Extraction was taking place far beyond what the permits allowed. The joint committee of the tribunal and the pollution control board estimated that between 10.62 lakh and 15.3 lakh tonnes of riverbed material had been extracted from the surveyed stretch.A JCB excavates and loads bajri from the Rambiara riverbed near Lassipora Industrial Estate, Pulwama, Kashmir. Photo: Nisar Ul Haq Allaie.Permits and environmental clearanceA permit may authorise the removal of a specified quantity of sand, gravel (bajri) or boulders from a defined location. But whether extraction complied with environmental requirements, remained within the authorised boundary, followed the permitted method or altered the river system is for authorities to monitor.“All mining requires environmental clearance in general. Activities listed in appendix IX [to the 2006 environmental impact assessment notification] are exempt from prior environmental clearance. This includes dredging, for which there are separate guidelines,” Yadav said.However, some district collectors and district mining officers are issuing short-term permits (STPs) without the required environmental clearance – going beyond the exemptions already allowed in the appendix.A source in the J&K government’s department of mines, who is not authorised to speak to the media, said that especially after 2019, lease holders have been using political influence to get STPs and extensions to them without clearance from the environment clearance committee.An STP cannot automatically be treated as a substitute for environmental clearance or other statutory approvals where those approvals are required.Under J&K’s 2016 mining rules, an STP is meant for specified quantities of minor minerals, for a specified period and area, and can be granted only with applicable statutory clearances and environmental safeguards.Ground monitoring of mining in KashmirThe problem is compounded by the satellite-based imagery system that is purportedly meant to identify illegal extraction. While it is a part of the regulatory architecture, it has failed to make a dent in the crisis caused by mining.On paper, satellite imagery can identify excavation, disturbed sediment, vehicle tracks and changes in river morphology. Thereafter, who carried out the extraction, the precise quantity removed or whether the activity was covered by a valid permission, must be separately verified on the ground.“The EC committee relies on satellite imagery at the time of grant or refusal of environmental clearance. However, the department of geology and mining relies on periodic satellite data for triggering alerts regarding suspected illegal mining,” Yadav explained.According to the Union Ministry of Mines, J&K recorded 24 Mining Surveillance System (MSS) alerts between 2021-22 and 2025-26 in Kashmir, confirming only one instance, located in Pulwama, as unauthorised mining after field verification.The highest number of alerts for J&K were recorded in 2024-25, at 13. No alerts were recorded in 2025-26.Many of these details emerged in the Union government’s response to a question in parliament on the mechanisms in place to monitor illegal mining across the country and the number of cases detected through the MSS during the past five years.Bhat said that the solution was a network of CCTV cameras across vulnerable resource-rich areas. “The installation of CCTVs and use of drones will expose illegal mining, but they have not even been procured by the government. I want to ask the mining minister and deputy chief minister [of J&K] Surinder Chowdhary: Why?”Bhat is not the only one. Even the 12-member Legislative Committee on Environment in the J&K assembly has proposed measures from satellite surveillance to GPS tracking, digital monitoring, e-permits and e-challans and the Unified Mining Portal.9,417 seizures, 285 FIRsOfficial data show that J&K authorities carried out 9,417 seizures and registered 285 FIRs against illegal mining during 2025-26, recovering just over Rs 20 crore in penalties.A team from the Indian government during its visit to the Sukhnag mining site on March 18, 2026. Photo by arrangement.The Wire contacted Pawan Kumar Sharma, director of the Geology and Mining Department, to seek clarification on the gap between seizures and FIRs, as well as concerns raised by environment watchers. The official did not respond to requests for comment. This story will be updated if and when the department responds.The district-wise data show wide variations in the government’s response to the challenges posed by mining. Kathua recorded the highest number of seizures at 1,019, but only one FIR was registered. Kupwara reported 972 seizures and 48 FIRs, while Baramulla recorded 845 seizures and 41 FIRs. Samba recorded 800 seizures but no FIR.Budgam recorded the highest number of FIRs, with 62 cases registered against 671 seizures. It was followed by Kupwara with 48 FIRs, Baramulla with 41, Ganderbal with 30 and Srinagar with 29.In effect, not every violation corresponds with an FIR. There is no clarity about how violations are classified, when (or if) criminal prosecution is initiated and whether repeat or serious offences are escalated.The data, in itself, shows substantial enforcement activity, but was extraction prevented, how many cases involved permit-holders, how many concerned riverbed mining, how many were repeat violations or how much money was ultimately spent on environmental restoration – none of these questions were answered.Legislative committee on environment sought detailed explanationIllegal mining was discussed by the Legislative Committee on Environment chaired by M.Y. Tarigami, an MLA in the J&K assembly, in August 2026. Committee members sought a detailed explanation from the Union Territory’s department of mines regarding the gap between seizures and FIRs.Tarigami directed the department to provide comprehensive details of the first and second penalties imposed on violators before the seizure of their vehicles, machinery or minerals. He said this information was necessary to assess whether enforcement mechanisms were working – or failing.The committee has also called for stronger coordination among the revenue, police, forest and district administrations. It urged zero tolerance for mechanised mining beyond permit zones.When it came to penalties imposed for illegal mining or violations of the rules, Kathua led with Rs 3.308 crore, followed by Jammu with Rs 2.248 crore, Pulwama with Rs 2.008 crore, Baramulla with Rs 1.618 crore and Kupwara with Rs 1.499 crore.Anantnag recorded 530 seizures and recovered Rs 1.01 crore, while Kulgam reported 391 seizures and Rs 0.949 crore. Jammu district recorded 679 seizures, 15 FIRs and Rs 2.248 crore in penalties. Reasi recorded 356 seizures, while Rajouri and Udhampur reported 317 and 277 seizures respectively.Ramban recorded 39 seizures and Kishtwar 58. Neither district registered an FIR.At a recent JKEAC meeting on July 18, the members of the committee examined the environmental compliance position of a two-hectare riverbed-mining block, Minor Mineral Block-24 at the Sheikhpora Trenz Bridge, upstream of the Rambiara Nalla in Shopian.After examining Google Earth imagery, the committee recorded “conspicuous signatures of intensive excavation” and other signs of intensive excavation beyond the boundary of the sanctioned mining block.The committee directed the authorities to undertake ground verification to cross-check what the imagery showed as well as apportion responsibility and accountability.Police does take suo motu action when the civil administration is not available. These anti-mining operations, however, can be risk-prone, as unauthorised mining, in particular, takes place after dark and in the remote areas.An official from the Chadoora revenue department said that whenever they receive complaints of illegal mining along the Doodh Ganga Canal, which flows through Chadoora, they immediately try to identify the violator, issue a summons and inform the police. However, the official said the department has a limited role in the enforcement process.“Police does take action in mining-related cases generally following a complaint from the concerned department. However, police can take action on their own when they witness illegal mining or the movement of vehicles without valid approval,” a senior police official said.In a fragile Himalayan landscape where rivers, streams, wetlands, aquifers and floodplains are closely interconnected, the ecological cost of poorly regulated mining can extend far beyond the excavation site. The developments over the last few years indicate gaps in enforcement even though regulations exist on paper.