I'm not an angler (though I should be..) but as far as I'm aware there is no national legislation outlawing lead weights for fishing tackle in the UK, though clubs and private lake and river owners may choose to ban it on their waters. But a ban on lead ammunition for firearms has been introduced. This is less of a problem for new shotguns as pretty much all of them are now proofed for steel shot, but older and often valuable shotguns could become worthless wall ornaments because of the legislation. And it's potentially a big problem with rifles. There are legal minimums on calibre and muzzle energy when shooting certain quarry, such as deer.
In England and Wales deer must not be shot with a calibre smaller than .240 and the load must be making a minimum of 1700 ft/lb in muzzle energy (there is no upper limit but if you apply for a licence for a calibre that is deemed over the top for your intended use you're unlikely to get it). And the bullet must be a minimum of 50 grain. In Scotland it's .220 cal and 1000 ft/lb for the smallest deer species as theoretically they are smaller animals in Scotland because there is supposedly less nutritious feed available to them in the harsher highland environment than in England. In practice it's nonsense since the smaller roe deer species are generally found in lowland areas where the forage is just as good as in the rest of the UK. Highland reds are smaller than lowland English reds because they live on sparse moorland and mountains, but otherwise there's little difference in secies size across the country.
The lead ban matters because if, for example, you have a .243 for shooting roe deer an England and Wales, it is quite possible that the lighter composite bullets you will have to use when the lead ban comes into effect will fall short of the required muzzle energy. That would render the rifle useless as a deer gun without rebarreling to a larger calibre, say 6.5 mm. And in Scotland where shooters can use .223 for small deer species, they will have the same problem. An even if the non-lead rounds stay within legal energy limits, if they are lighter and faster they may not be compatible with the twist rate of a rifle barrel that was designed for lead. More expensive rifles rendered obsolete by the stroke of a pen.
For rabbit and small vermin shooting the .22lr is very popular, especially using quiet subsonic rounds coupled with night vision. What non-lead replacement can be found for these unjacketed rounds no one yet knows. And if a non-lead bullet is substantially lighter how can it be kept subsonic except by drastically reducing the powder load which will adversely impact range and effectiveness.
It's not clear what environmental benefit there is in outlawing lead bullets. I can see the argument for preventing the beds of estuaries and rivers becoming contaminated with lead shot from wildfowlers, which then gets into the stomachs of fish and birds, but single bullets that end up in the ground where lead is a naturally occurring element anyway? It makes no sense. The problem is the politicians have rushed this legislation through without consultation with gun owners and the shooting lobby and before ammunition manufacturers have had time to adequately develop and trial effective non-lead alternatives. It is all part of the continuing war in this country against private gun ownership.
