It was disturbing news that the governor recently vetoed one longtime funding source for salmon restoration, a move followed by the passing of a rather small congressional package. The veto and cut present some uncertainty for a burgeoning industry on the North Coast.

The decisions are not the end of that industry. In fact, during several years, state funding has come from a variety of sources to fill in shortfalls, and this year state Sen. Wesley Chesbro has pledged to include funding in a bond measure. But we’re not sure that allowing the potential dilemma to crop up represents the pinnacle of foresight.

Salmon restoration is important to the North Coast on a number of levels. Firstly, our salmon runs continue to suffer the effects of dams, logging and water diversions, keeping some species on the protected list. That affects timber companies, ranchers and fishermen. Secondly, the effort to reverse these problems has spawned a thriving group of people who have developed state-of-the-art methods used all over the United States and farther. Third, many restoration projects are a boon to counties or cities; recall culvert replacements that not only remove barriers to migrating fish, but also significantly improve road infrastructure.

What the recent fiscal woes instill is the need for far more stable and diverse funding sources. Industries do not do well with wildly fluctuating cash flows, and the salmon restoration industry is no different.

More than filling the gap this year, lawmakers should be relentlessly pursuing vehicles that are more long term than the year-to-year funding that is so often relied on. Restoration groups must continue to work to develop diverse pools of money, and continue to work with private landowners interested in seeing work on their property.

We will all do better with such certainty. So will the fish.