Geoscience matters

I am writing as a constituent deeply concerned about proposed cuts to funding for geological mapping programs, particularly those supporting the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and state geological surveys. A recent New York Times article (June 20 2025) highlighted that reductions in such funding could threaten critical efforts to locate and responsibly use essential minerals—materials vital for our clean-energy transition and broader economic security. Geological mapping isn’t an abstract scientific exercise—it’s the foundation of smart, efficient, and sustainable resource development. A 2025 report by the American Geosciences Institute found that every dollar invested in mapping has returned seven to tenfold in economic benefit, and in some cases up to thirty-five times  . These maps inform infrastructure planning, natural hazard mitigation, water resource management, and the identification of mineral deposits necessary for next-generation batteries, wind turbines, solar panels, and national defense . Since 2019, federal funding for geological mapping has seen a dramatic increase—from $24 million to over $45 million annually—due to programs like Earth MRI and the National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program (NCGMP)  . These efforts have supported tens of millions in individual state initiatives, such as $500,000 dedicated to mapping in New York and over $320 million through Earth MRI at the federal level  . Cutting these programs now would undermine decades of progress. Without up-to-date geological maps, we risk missing strategic critical mineral deposits, delaying clean-energy projects, and exposing communities to preventable geologic hazards. It would also erode the high economic return and job-creation potential demonstrated by recent investments. I urge you to oppose any reductions to current geological mapping funding. Please support sustained and, where feasible, increased appropriations for USGS and state geological surveys—especially within NCGMP and Earth MRI—so that our nation’s critical mineral needs and environmental resilience can continue to be met. Thank you for your leadership on science and infrastructure. I appreciate your consideration of this issue and hope you will stand in defense of America’s foundational geoscience capabilities.