Pheasant Shooting

That's encouraging. I fully support it too, for native populations of salmon and sea trout (as opposed to commercial stocked fisheries). The subject usually prompts howls of indignation from the wider RSPB community; as I'm sure we'll see.

Unknown said:

" I really don't see how that sits with one of the Society's prime objectives of opposing the 'wanton destruction of birds'." Not sure about that ...

I think describing specific and targeted removal of specific birds as "wanton" is slightly disingenuous. In the interest of balance - and because the Countryside Alliance (aka The Shooting Industry Mouthpiece) has shown itself to be less then reliable in recent times with information - Martin's blog they refer to http://www.rspb.org.uk/community/ourwork/b/martinharper/archive/2013/06/13/wildlife-licensing-how-the-rspb-uses-it-to-support-nature-conservation.aspx

In it he makes clear what the situations were where control was necessary, along with why it was very much a last resort.  Mostly it's about protecting a specific species as part of conservation measures, though the greylag/canada geese example was to protect aircraft taking off at neighbouring airfields.  As I see it, at the simplest level, the RSPB uses the licensing system to benefit conservation; the licenses the RSPB protest about are those stripping predators from commercial operations in order to maximise profits.

On the subject of Royal Charters - writing to RSPB Head Office is probably the best way to communicate suggestions for changes