In response to today's New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/25/weekinreview/25RIDL.html) I posted the following to their message board :

Science is not about the cloaked preachings of so-and-so. And MAD COW DISEASE IS NO LESS SCAREY DESPITE Matt Ridley's smoke screen in today's NYTimes ("LEARNING THROUGH SCIENCE: Mad Cow Disease Is a Little Less Scary"). In fact yesterday I posted the following in Vancouver (and elsewhere):
I read a few years ago (and I'm not sure where, perhaps in Scientific American) that Pacific salmon are vulnerable to the prion that causes Mad Cow Disease. Now, according to the news, some of the chicken feed shipped to British Columbia contains rendered protein from an Albertan Mad Cow. We can all imagine the fish and their fry eating the animal feed as it enters the rivers flowing to the Pacific. So should we ask a hard and wild question: How much prion-contaminated farm feed will it take to contaminate our Pacific salmon?
Max Ledbetter
http://thefishfinder.com/members/saltwater/ledbetter


And here was an interesting e-mail response:

Re: Salmon and Mad Cow Disease
I may well be interested, but would really have to know a bit more about the nature of your work before I could give you any kind of answer or ask to see the manuscript. The typical e-mail query consists of a letter describing your work in general (plot, etc.), and is usually accompanied by a synopsis/outline and a brief biographical note.
Please note that screenplay queries are deleted unread.
Best wishes.
William Clark
Wm CLARK ASSOCIATES
http://www.wmclark.com/