Conducting a national urban forest management survey – Insights from the 2025 Canadian Urban Forest Census

National surveys of municipal urban foresters provide an opportunity to summarize the state of urban forestry programs and provide benchmarking opportunities for practitioners, allowing municipalities to compare their programs with those of similar sized municipalities. Such surveys – often termed “urban forest censuses” – have been conducted using varying methodologies internationally, including in Canada, the United States, Sweden, New Zealand, England, Great Britain, and the Republic of Ireland. To encourage the expansion of such surveys, this Short Communication details the methods used in the 2025 Canadian Urban Forest Census (French: Recensement des forêts urbaines canadiennes ), which obtained a 40% response rate among all Canadian urban municipalities, cities, regions, and towns. Designed with the support of urban forestry researchers across Canada, our bilingual, online survey was disseminated using a mixed-methods approach that included advertisement on a national urban forest electronic mailing list and LinkedIn; distribution of the online survey via a QR code on mailed postcards; and distribution and redistribution of the online survey link through email. We found that distribution and redistribution through email was the most successful approach with few responses initiated through the postal mail invitation. A greater response rate was achieved when we could obtain direct contact information for urban foresters or directors of parks, maintenance, urbanism, or related departments. Our results suggest that piloting surveys with municipal foresters and prioritizing email-based dissemination to identified contacts are key strategies for achieving high-quality, cost-effective response rates in urban forest management surveys. • We surveyed Canadian municipalities about their urban forestry activities • We obtained a 40% response rate using a replicable approach to survey dissemination • Email distribution and redistribution was more successful than postal mail invitations • Direct contact with individuals (e.g., directors, urban foresters) obtained the highest response rate • Piloting the survey helped match survey questions to municipal data collection practices