I don't see how that makes it "a bad way to look at it" I didn't discuss the implications of likely changes in precipitation at all. Just stated what kinds of c

I don't see how that makes it "a bad way to look at it" I didn't discuss the implications of likely changes in precipitation at all. Just stated what kinds of changes are likely in my opinion. I also don't think the consequences as easy to predict as you think. For example cross crops may transpire less because of their pores being closed more due to higher CO2 concentrations. That may be good, depending on the crop and location. There will be higher flow in most rivers, and by association most lakes (but offset by higher evaporation) which could be good both for humans and irrigation. I think the answer is complicated and difficult to predict. Current unsustainable practices with respect to both soil and groundwater depletion will still be unsustainable. Parts of California are not a great place to grow crops sustainably, at least not the kinds of water and soil intensive crops currently grown. That may increase or decrease on the whole over time due to climate change, it's tough to say with any certainty.