It is indeed at the state level where the danger of lead restrictions or bans can become law. In some cases, they make sense. For example, most public wetlands in Iowa are restricted to nontox only for all kinds of hunting. Seeing that pheasants are hunted on those areas as well as waterfowl, that ban makes sense. But generally speaking--other than perhaps on public land where doves are hunted and shot fall is much heavier than it is in most other upland situations--lead restrictions don't really make sense.

But specifically concerning Minnesota, my file on lead shot includes "Report of the Nontoxic Shot Advisory Committee Submitted to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Fish and Wildlife Division, December 12, 2006". One of the principles on which that committee agreed was: "It is inevitable that lead shot will have to be restricted for all shotgun hunting at some future time."

Meanwhile, there are bright spots. Tall Timbers, a 500 acre quail research facility in Florida where 8,000 shells had been fired (meaning that shot fall was much heavier than in typical upland hunting scenarios: They examined the gizzards of 241 quail. Only 3 contained pellets. Their conclusion:

"Sport hunting of wild bobwhite populations on upland habitats appears to produce a low potential for lead poisoning compared to lead deposition in association with waterfowl and dove hunting.