Deserts feed forests, true, but they are also carbon sinks in their own ways! Ways that are as yet poorly-understood -- but we know that, for example, the roots of mesquite trees can penetrate hundreds of feet deep in search of water. In doing so, they transport carbon deep underground, where it reacts with calcium to form caliche, deposits of calcium carbonate. In this mineral form it can remain buried practically indefinitely -- in contrast to the biological carbon sinks of forests, which cycle carbon back into the atmosphere on a much shorter (though still long) time-frame. When desert plants convert atmospheric carbon into sugars, that carbon too is buried in dense reserves among the symbiotic fungal networks of their roots; this glomalin, while not unique to deserts, stores a full third of the world's soil carbon
Why must deserts serve forests to be worthwhile?
Why must deserts be carbon sinks at all to be valued?
Deserts are beautiful, rich and unique ecosystems, with communities and histories all their own
The fact that they appear sparse, that -- in technical terms -- they have a lower density of biomass than other habitats, does not mean that they are empty of life. The plants and animals of the world's deserts are hardy, clever, and resilient; like tundra and mountains, their communities grow slowly, with many plants growing only fractions of an inch per year, for thousands of years -- damage is catastrophic. Others, and many animals, flourish in the rare moments when water is plenty, erupting into a frenzy of life and activity before retreating to dormancy
Without the camel, or the sidewinder snake, or the hairy scorpion; the African lungfish, and the constellated diversity of Tanganyika cichlids; without the saguaro or the Joshua tree or strange, ancient Welsitschia; the Syntrichia moss that draws water directly from the air; the dense, bulbous Ilareta shrub --
Without the painted mountains of Peru; without the stone forests of Tsingy de Bemahara; without the singing sands of the Namib, and Gobi, and Taklamakan; the high salt flats of the Atacama where flamingoes raise their young --
Our world would be so much poorer.
Over the millennia of human existence countless peoples have made their homes with deserts. On every continent save Antarctica, human cultures and histories have molded & been molded by desert homes; have lived with them, and loved them, and managed them, and been part of them
The camel, llama, and alpaca; the lion, crocodile, and and sacred vulture; even our beloved housecats -- we owe them all to deserts
The pigeon! Our everyday, ubiquitous Columba livia! Heroes of world wars, foundational to the theory of evolution, prized friends and companions (and, yes, livestock) to humanity for five thousand years! Whose ability to find home across hundreds of miles originated (we believe) to bring them back to their cliffside roosts after foraging faraway sources of food and water across the Mediterranean deserts of their origin!
The Nazca lines survive only because their desert environment is dry enough to preserve them; the Pueblo peoples carved homes into cliff faces; Uluru (map by Tony Tjamiwa) is sacred to the Pitjantjatjara people
And the thoughtless colonial erasure -- "greening" -- of these deserts is the genocide of their peoples, packaged as environmentalism, appealing to Euro-centric aesthetics and ideals of "nature." The label of "wasteland" is historically inextricable from genocide -- literally, labelling a land and the people who live there "waste" to discard and obliterate
We see this today in Palestine, where olive groves are razed for pine forests planted over the ruins of Palestinian towns whose people were slaughtered and exiled in the founding of the state of Israel, to hide that they were ever there, that any atrocity was committed -- an ongoing genocide that has continued for some 70 years, a proud slogan upheld by the Israeli occupation! "Making the Desert Bloom" ... in a manner economically productive for European industrial agriculture, fertile on the bodies of Palestine's people, on the eradication of the "empty" "wasteland" the first Zionist settlers "found"
Whether deserts serve as carbon sinks; how they compare as carbon sinks to other habitats; whether they feed forests -- all of these questions are important, true, but none of them matter as to whether deserts are worthwhile. Whether deserts get to exist.
Deserts get to exist because they are alive, and dynamic, and historied. Deserts get to exist because they have been homes for people and cultures since time immemorial. Deserts get to exist because each of them is unique, and to lose any of them would be a tragic, irreparable atrocity