Zone 2 is suggested to have thin, prune, and selectively remove evergreen trees. The horizontal space between single or grouped-tree crowns of evergreen trees should have at least 3 m with no branches to a height of 2 m from the ground. The thinning and pruning are also suggested for Zone 3 (if possible) [25]. Following the FireSmart Canada guidelines, [PERSON] et al. [1] assessed wildland fire risk for the communities of Fort McMurray urban service area following a remote sensing approach, i.e., using a high spatial resolution WorldView-2 satellite image of post-HRF, and Google Earth Pro images for pre-HRF and during HRF events. The study considered three priority zones (FireSmart Canada Priority Zones 1-3), and used the property-lines as the WUI line considering the typical wood fence boundary as structures. In the study, they applied a method of vegetation presence as a risk factor in the Priority Zones (i.e., 10, 30, and 100 m buffers from the WUI line), particularly the presence of vegetation inside the 10 m buffer. Furthermore, they used two additional buffers (50 and 70 m) to identify the risk areas at WUI. They quantified on-stand vegetation presence in all the five buffer zones and categorized into five risk groups, such as extreme, very high, high, medium, and low. Based on the qualitative and quantitative assessments of HRF, the study reported several mitigation strategies for communities to minimize the risks from the threat of wildland fires. They recommended for any future development that the social service infrastructures, recreation facilities, large shopping malls, and major highways could be constructed at the outskirts of the communities, where the parking lots should be facing towards the forest. Constructing a 70 m wide ring road around a community was also recommended by the authors in a media coverage [26]. The recommended approaches and structures would act as fuel-breaks and barriers to protect fire spreading towards the communities during a wildland fire. In addition, the community resilience from wildland fires depends on the land use framework, municipal development plan, expansion of industrial activities (in particular, oil sands development for the Fort McMurray communities), and provincial forest management regulations. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [27] demonstrated a tool named Community Wildfire Protection Planning (CWPP) to collaborate among multiple stakeholders to prioritize areas for fuel (i.e., vegetation) mitigation, reduce structural ignitability, and involve communities for mitigation and adaptation strategies [28]. Wildland fire management in Canada is a provincial and territorial responsibility, except few jurisdictions of the national parks under the Federal Government [29; 30]. The Canadian Wildland Fire Strategy (CWFS) developed in 2006 under the auspices of the Canadian Council of Forest Ministers (CCFM) with the concerns of wildland fire risks had been growing [31]. Government efforts had been in place to engage public focuses on providing information to assist people living in the forested communities in understanding risks and associated mitigation measures that they could undertake [32]. All these stimulating approaches attempted to engage communities actively for their supports to enhance mitigation measures. While the perception of the communities has utmost importance, [PERSON] et al. [1] did not engage them in recommending the mitigation measures in their study. In this context, our goal of this study was to engage professionals representing the major stakeholders and rightsholders (including First Nations, and Metis Organizations) of Fort McMurray communities, and synthesize their perceptions to strengthen wildland fire-induced mitigation strategies.