Environmental policy — Mining ban near protected areas: what actions follow? Statement: A notification bans mining and allied industry operations within 25 km of national parks, sanctuaries, and reserve forests in Gujarat, risking shutdown of certain mines. Which courses of action logically follow?

Introduction / Context:This question examines environmental regulation and reasonable responses. A government notification restricts mining near ecologically sensitive zones. We must decide whether the proposed reactions are logical and practicable given conservation priorities and administrative realities.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Mining within 25 km of protected areas is banned by a departmental notification.
• Course I: Ask the department to immediately withdraw the notification.
• Course II: Shift parks, sanctuaries, and reserve forests to other non-mining areas.
• Assume the ban aims to protect biodiversity and habitats.

Concept / Approach:

• A valid course should address the stated problem responsibly (environmental risk) and be administratively feasible.
• Immediate withdrawal (I) ignores the environmental rationale and due process; better approaches would balance livelihoods with safeguards, not summarily cancel protections.
• Relocating protected areas (II) is ecologically unsound and administratively unrealistic; forests and ecosystems cannot simply be moved.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

Common Pitfalls:

Final Answer: