I think what Greenberg means by “I couldn’t help but think that in a way the future of wild salmon and the future of the Yupik people were somehow sadly parallel to each other.” is that without the Yupik people fighting to save the salmon and protecting the salmon and their own rights corporate greed could take over. They could take advantage of our natural resources and a big part of a lot of Alaska native cultures as well as the main food source in the summer that often flows well into the winter. I think I agree with him. Without the support and need for salmon in Alaska (by Alaska natives and Alaska residents) both the Yupik people including their land and future generations of salmon would soon dwindle. If I remember correctly that would be a mutual relationship between salmon and the Yupik community as they both benefit from each other. In a way, I think if there was a huge loss of salmon population across the state there would be a large push for hatcheries to stock the rivers and lakes and more rules and regs to limit fishing until the numbers were increasing.
Something I hadn’t thought about was the “wild-stocked” salmon here in Alaska. Normally about 80% of naturally (no human interference) laid eggs die due to natural selection. It’s brought up that when the smolt from hatcheries are put into their respective rivers based on their parent’s genetics and so on could be bringing in the weaker bunch of salmon or the ones that would have died if they had been laid in the wild. Bringing them into the rivers could cause “bad” genes to be passed onto future generations which could ultimately lead to weaker and smaller populations of salmon in that area.