Dear FAST Friends Last month, Australians went to the polls and voted decisively to return the federal Labor Government to power with a strong majority in the House of Representatives and the ability to pass legislation through the Senate with the support of the Greens.  This is good news for animals. In the lead up to the election, the Australian Labor Party publicly committed to a suite of animal welfare policies, including: * Protecting the legislated phase out of live sheep exports by 2028 (the conversative coalition was vowing to overturn the phase out if elected) * Expanding the role of the federal Inspector-General of Animal Welfare and Live Animal Exports to include oversight of abattoirs registered for export (where the vast majority of Australian sheep and cattle are slaughtered) * Providing funding for the implementation of the Australian Animal Welfare Strategy  * Supporting the expansion of tax Deductible Gift Recipient (DGR) status to animal welfare advocacy organisations (potentially unlocking millions of dollars in additional donations) * Developing a national animal welfare trade policy to promote the inclusion of animal welfare provisions in international trade agreements How was this achieved? In the lead up to the election, we canvassed the positions of all major parties on the above policies. In the course of doing so, we presented the parties with our plans for a strategically targeted digital and outdoor advertising campaign that would run for the duration of the election campaign.  The advertising campaign would highlight the parties’ positions to voters nationally, and in 18 specific electorates, chosen for their strategic significance to each party’s electoral prospects. This proved influential in the negotiation of the parties’ positions.  During the course of the election campaign, Alliance member organisations and campaign allies helped promote the election campaign assets, collectively achieving over 8 million impressions an

A hidden crisis Literally, quintillions1 of animals are suffering and dying right now in the wild, due to disease, hunger, thirst, excessive heat or cold, and other factors. Yet, most people—including those who express concern for animals—fail to give importance to this issue. Why? In this article, we explore the cognitive biases2 that lead us to ignore one of the world’s largest sources of suffering and death.3 Understanding these biases can help us think more clearly about our moral responsibilities. The magnitude of the problem When we think of animal suffering, we often picture factory farms or labs that test on animals. These are indeed serious problems. But the number of wild animals is vastly larger, estimated between 1 and 10 quintillion at any given time.4 To understand this, consider the following analogy: If we compressed the total number of animals exploited by humans and the total number of wild animals into a one-year timeline, the animals used by humans would represent just 14 seconds. Wild animals would represent the remaining 364 days, 23 hours, 59 minutes, and 46 seconds.1 The vast majority of wild animals suffer daily due to natural causes. Despite its immense scale, this issue receives very little attention. Even among animal advocates and animal ethicists, the problem remains largely ignored. This doesn’t seem logical when looking at the figures. Below, we will explore several biases that can cause this. Status quo bias: Resistance to changing beliefs Our minds are naturally resistant to change, whether in habits or beliefs. This is known as status quo bias. Several related patterns reinforce this: * Bandwagon effect: we tend to believe what those around us believe * System justification bias: we defend current systems and norms * Conservatism bias: we hesitate to update our beliefs, even with new evidence Key question: If everyone around you focused only on animal exploitation, how likely would you be to think about the suffering o