Ontario Bill 23: A Looming Disaster for Migratory Birds
Sweeping policy changes in Ontario threaten millions of birds along the Atlantic Flyway and undermine decades of conservation work.
Ontario’s sweeping Bill 23, intended to accelerate housing construction, contains provisions with potentially catastrophic consequences for migratory birds. By stripping municipalities of the power to enforce bird-friendly building standards, Bill 23 threatens to reverse decades of conservation gains and escalate bird fatalities, especially along the ecologically vital Atlantic Flyway.
Understanding Bill 23
Enacted as the More Homes Built Faster Act, Bill 23 was presented as a solution to Ontario’s housing crisis. However, beneath the development-friendly language, the legislation erodes a slew of environmental protections long championed by municipal governments and conservation groups :
- Removes municipal authority to enforce bird-friendly building standards
- Weakens green building and sustainability regulations
- Overrides local environmental oversight in favor of provincial mandates
- Creates legal uncertainties for building owners and developers
While the bill claims to expedite housing, critics argue it does little to increase affordability and disproportionately benefits large-scale developers, often at the expense of wildlife and critical habitats .
Municipal Bird-Friendly Standards: A Hard-Won Victory Threatened
For years, Ontario municipalities led Canada by incorporating bird-friendly design principles into new building codes . These standards required features such as patterned glass, reduced reflectivity, and minimized transparent passageways, drastically reducing dangerous glass collisions for migratory birds:
- Toronto adopted bird-friendly guidelines as part of its Green Building Standard, mandating visible glass treatments on new high-rise structures
- Mississauga, Markham, and other cities followed suit, embedding protection for birds at risk into their zoning bylaws
- These measures were proven to prevent tens of thousands of bird deaths every year, particularly in major migration stopovers and urban centers
Bill 23 effectively nullifies these rules, leaving developers free to use reflective and transparent glass freely—despite known dangers .
Bird-Window Collisions: The Scope of the Crisis
Building collisions are one of the leading causes of bird mortality in North America. The numbers are staggering:
- Over one billion birds die every year in North America after colliding with windows
- 42 million of these deaths occur in Canada
- Over one million birds die annually in Toronto alone, where dense clusters of tall buildings line the Atlantic Flyway
Urban areas like Toronto and Mississauga, with their proliferation of glass-clad structures, create an immense hazard for migratory birds, especially during peak migration seasons in spring and fall .
Why Are Birds Vulnerable?
Migratory birds rely heavily on instinct and visual cues during long-distance flights. Many species, such as swallows, warblers, and Purple Martins, fly at night and navigate by starlight or city lights, leading them directly into urban glass landscapes:
What others are reading
- Glass is invisible to birds; reflections of sky and vegetation lure them into deadly collisions
- Transparent tunnels and open walkways can disorient birds, causing repetitive impacts
- Constant urban expansion means that hazards are rapidly increasing along migration routes
Legal Context: A Patchwork of Protection
Before Bill 23, Ontario offered some of the strongest protections for bird habitats in Canada, bolstered by federal regulations:
- Migratory Birds Regulations (2022) classify glass collisions as illegal incidental take of protected species
- Under the Species at Risk Act, property owners could face fines up to $1 million per bird killed
- Landmark cases like Podolsky v. Cadillac Fairview (2013) held developers accountable for failing to mitigate collisions, setting critical legal precedents
With Bill 23, municipalities can no longer enforce these standards, placing the onus solely on provincial and federal regulators whose enforcement may be limited or inconsistent .
Bill 5 and the Gutting of the Endangered Species Act
Bill 23’s impact is compounded by recent legislation such as Bill 5 (Protect Ontario by Unleashing our Economy Act), which dismantled Ontario’s original Endangered Species Act and replaced it with a weaker version :
- Eliminates legal habitat protection for threatened and endangered birds—only nests are protected, not broader habitats
- Sidesteps required Indigenous consultation and reduces opportunities for public participation
- Grants sweeping powers to the provincial cabinet to approve major developments without environmental review
- Voluntary conservation replaces regulatory requirements, undermining recovery efforts for rare species
This legal rollback means that developers are no longer required to avoid sensitive habitats unless federally mandated, encouraging rapid high-impact development in ecologically critical zones .
Climate Change and Migratory Miscalculations
Climate change further complicates bird conservation in Ontario. Migratory species time their journeys based on historical weather patterns programmed in their genes. Rapid shifts in temperature, precipitation, and seasonality are making it harder for birds to anticipate favorable conditions :
- Birds like Purple Martins winter deep in the Amazon and cannot predict conditions in Ontario months ahead
- Unpredictable weather disrupts breeding, feeding, and migration, compounding losses from collisions
- Many migrants now arrive too early or late for peak food abundance, resulting in population declines
Without robust protections, the combined pressures of habitat loss and climate disruption could spell disaster for dozens of species.
Retrofitting vs. Building for Bird Safety
Bird-friendly design is both a matter of conservation and due diligence for property owners. Retrofitting existing buildings with patterned glass or external treatments is expensive and legally fraught, whereas incorporating these elements at the design stage is cost-effective and relatively straightforward:
- Retrofitting can cost thousands to millions of dollars per building, often paid by owners—not developers
- Building for bird safety from the start is significantly less expensive and prevents future legal liability
- Owners facing retrofit costs might seek restitution from builders under Bill 17, potentially triggering protracted lawsuits
The removal of municipal standards by Bill 23 places future liabilities squarely on individual owners and residents, rather than the developers responsible for the original construction .
Call for Federal Action: The CSA A460 Bird-Friendly Building Design Standard
Conservation advocates, led by organizations like FLAP Canada, are calling for the federal government to incorporate the CSA A460: Bird-Friendly Building Design standard into the National Building Code :
- The CSA A460 standard provides science-based guidelines for minimizing bird collisions
- Adoption into the National Building Code would establish consistent requirements across provinces and territories
- This would provide a baseline for protection, even as provincial environmental laws are weakened
Impacts on the Atlantic Flyway: A Wider Conservation Crisis
The Atlantic Flyway is one of North America’s major migratory routes, stretching from South America to the Canadian Arctic. Ontario is a crucial stopover:
- Millions of birds pause in southern Ontario’s forests, wetlands, and grasslands
- Urban development in Toronto, Mississauga, and surrounding areas has already created high-risk zones for bird collisions
- Loss of municipal standards threatens to turn the entire corridor into a hazardous bottleneck
Dismantling protections in Ontario could have ripple effects up and down the flyway, impacting populations continent-wide.
Your Voice Matters: Taking Action
Concerned citizens still have options to fight back against Bill 23’s consequences:
- Leave a comment on the Environmental Registry of Ontario before critical deadlines
- Contact elected representatives at municipal, provincial, and federal levels
- Join and support bird conservation groups, including FLAP Canada and Bird Studies Canada
- Ask builders and property managers about bird-friendly practices before purchasing or renting in new developments
Grassroots pressure and public advocacy are crucial for safeguarding Ontario’s birds and restoring sensible policy protections.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Why are glass buildings so deadly for birds?
Birds cannot perceive transparent or reflective glass as a barrier. They fly toward what appears to be open sky or vegetation, resulting in fatal collisions. Urban expansion increases the volume and concentration of these hazardous surfaces .
Did Bill 23 make bird-friendly building design illegal?
Bill 23 does not outlaw bird-friendly design but removes the legal requirement for municipalities to enforce it in new construction, making such features optional for developers .
Are there any federal rules protecting birds from building collisions?
Yes. The federal Migratory Birds Regulations and the Species at Risk Act classify avoidable bird deaths from glass collisions as illegal, and severe penalties (up to $1 million per bird) may apply. However, enforcement is inconsistent and less stringent than municipal standards historically maintained .
What can property owners do to make buildings safer for birds?
- Install patterned or frosted glass to break up reflections
- Use external screens or shutters
- Apply decals or UV treatments to windows, especially on lower and upper floors
- Maintain landscaping away from major glass surfaces
Which bird species are most affected?
Migratory songbirds, swallows, warblers, and threatened species such as Purple Martins are especially vulnerable due to extensive night flights through urban landscapes .
Table: Key Legislative Changes and Bird Protection
| Legislation | Protection Level Before Bill | Protection Level After Bill | Implications for Birds |
|---|---|---|---|
| Municipal bird-friendly standards | Mandatory for new builds | Voluntary; enforced only federally | Increased risk of collisions and fatalities |
| Endangered Species Act (provincial) | Habitat and nest protection | Nest-only protection; habitat voluntary | More habitat lost to development |
| Federal Migratory Birds Regulations | Incidental take from building collisions illegal | No change, but enforcement weakened | Possible penalties, but risk higher for birds |
| CSA A460 Bird-Friendly Building Design | Not federally required | Advocacy for national standard underway | Would restore consistent protections if adopted |
In Summary
Ontario’s Bill 23 and related anti-environmental legislation threaten to undo years of progress in bird conservation. Without robust municipal authority to enforce bird-friendly design and habitat protection, millions of birds—many already at risk from climate change—face heightened peril along critical migration corridors. Grassroots action and federal leadership are imperative to restore science-based standards and safeguard Canada’s avian biodiversity for future generations.
References
- https://flap.org/bill-23/
- https://thepointer.com/article/2025-06-18/doug-ford-made-it-legal-to-create-bird-death-traps-to-speed-up-home-construction
- https://thepointer.com/article/2023-03-25/millions-of-birds-die-needlessly-in-our-cities-every-year-bill-23-threatens-to-ratchet-up-the-death-toll
- https://www.birdscanada.org/habitat-on-the-line-ontario-plans-to-eliminate-key-protections-for-endangered-birds
- https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3932&context=nabb
- https://www.birdscanada.org/bill-23
- http://atlanticflywayshorebirds.org/documents/AFSI_Business_Plan_11_2017.pdf
- https://extapps.dec.ny.gov/docs/wildlife_pdf/atlanticflywaygoose.pdf
- https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/08/11/2023-17175/migratory-bird-hunting-final-2023-24-frameworks-for-migratory-bird-hunting-regulations
Similar Articles
Read full bio of medha deb
