There's really no way to solve that, other than going to nontoxic bullets and slugs for deer and other big game, and nontoxic shot for upland game. But that switch would have a significantly negative impact on hunting, unless nontoxic bullets and shot as effective as lead and as cheap were available.
When federal authorities introduced the steel shot mandate in the 80's they forgot about the law or unintended consequences. The first effect was a significant loss of revenue, as much as 50%, from Duck Stamp sales as many hunters dropped out of the sport and never returned. The second effect was more ducks killed, steel shot as any veteran waterfowler knows is less effective than lead. Many more ducks were crippled, flying off to die later and the hunters just kept shooting until they filled their daily bag limit. Futher mandates of non-toxic shot and bullets will drive away more hunters and result in further revenue loss for wildlife agencies already struggling with the reduced funding from reduced license sales. It's classic, wildlife agencies passing regulation after regulation and then funding studies to find out why is participation and funding declining. They respond to the decline with ineffective marketing campaigns and programs such as Becoming An Outdoor Woman not realizing they are their own worst enemy.
