The purpose of this petition is to bring to your attention several concerns regarding the royal patronage of organizations such as the RSPCA/RSPB and other wildlife charities. Despite the perceived benefits, We at Republic believe it's crucial to question the alignment of these organizations with patrons whose actions seem to contradict their core values and missions.

Allow us to outline some specific reasons why we advocate for the immediate cessation of all association between the RSPCA and the Windsor family:

Conflicting values: Charles has voiced “concerns” over the charity for its stance on hunting and blood sports. The Windsor family has a long history of hunting, from photos of Harry posing with a buffalo he shot, Elizabeth repeatedly bashing a pheasant with her walking stick, to Charles even trying to convince former Prime minister Tony Blair that  fox hunting is “romantic” ,so there should be no ban. Kate and William have even been photographed taking a very young George Windsor on a hunting trip, receiving criticism for exposing a child to “casual killing”.

Animal welfare concerns: The Windsors are apparently dog lovers, but Edward Windsor was reported to the RSPCA over photos of him lashing out at his gundogs in 2008. Anne has even been fined after her dog bit two children as they walked in the Windsor Great Park. The Windsors are not responsible pet owners.

Abuse of authority: The Windsors love horse racing and horse breeding, but Elizabeth made almost 2 million pounds from the sale of two horses which were given as state gifts from Germany. The horses belonged to the state, not her. This money needs to be transferred back to the state immediately.

Failing to protect wildlife: Charle’s estate Sandringham in Norfolk has been linked to many deaths and disappearances of protected birds, mostly due to poisoning, traps and shooting. 
The Windsor family is the biggest landowner in the country, yet the campaign group Wildcard highlighted the fact that their land is dominated by hunting grounds, overgrazed and neglected spaces. It has an average of 6% tree coverage compared to the UK average of 13%. The Windsors clearly do not practise what they preach on the environment.

Environmental impact: Charles' carbon footprint is estimated to be at 423 tonnes. Considering the average UK resident’s carbon footprint is not even 12 tonnes, Charles is obviously an eco-hyprocrite. We see this time and again, as he frequently chooses to fly by helicopter and private jet instead of by car or more environmentally friendly means.

Questionable “benefits”: A report by the charity consultancy agency Just Giving showed that there is no discernible benefit to having royal patronage, so animal and wildlife charities have absolutely nothing to fear by breaking ties with a family that uses them for PR and token gestures.

In light of these serious concerns, we urge you to consider the following action:

-Sign and share our petition and evidence with others to raise awareness of the issues at hand.

By taking a stand on these issues, we can work together to promote true environmental and animal justice. If you would like to learn more about our campaigns for social justice and democratic reform, please visit Republic.org.uk.

Thank you for your attention to this important matter.