California homebuilders say they have few options but to keep buying Canadian lumber, even if it鈥檚 hit with 25 per cent tariffs, as they rebuild thousands of homes destroyed by devastating wildfires in Los Angeles.

Dan Dunmoyer, president of the California Building Industry Association, said Wednesday that 鈥渢here aren鈥檛 really alternatives鈥� to Canadian lumber used for homebuilding in the state because about 80 per cent of Californian land is owned by the federal or state governments and can鈥檛 be logged.

Dunmoyer also said California lacks mills, environmental policies and supply chains that would allow a quick switch to local lumber production, and making those changes would likely take years.

鈥淲e are very dependent on Canadian lumber,鈥� he said. 鈥淲e like Canadian lumber. It鈥檚 super high-quality, properly harvested for the environment. It鈥檚 really quality material.

鈥淚 understand from a president or a prime minister鈥檚 perspective, it鈥檚 all about jobs. It鈥檚 all about making sure your people have an income and a lifestyle, the quality of life, that鈥檚 enjoyable 鈥� But to try to do this over a weekend and say, 鈥楬ey, we just want to put these big tariffs on any country without creating the economy within your own country,鈥� (it) just means higher prices, full stop, full period.鈥�

U.S. President Donald Trump has threatened a 25 per cent tariff on most Canadian exports that would boost softwood lumber levies to almost 40 per cent when existing duties of 14.4 per cent are taken into account.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Trump said on Monday that the tariffs were on hold for 30 days.

The forestry sector in British Columbia and across Canada have described the proposed tariffs as unnecessary and unwarranted, given that the United States currently meets only about 70 per cent of its homebuilding lumber needs domestically while using Canadian lumber to fill the gap.

The U.S. raised duties on softwood lumber from Canada last August.

Trump said on Jan. 30 that the U.S. did not need foreign lumber and 鈥渨e have all the trees you need.鈥�

On Wednesday, the provincial government in B.C. announced it had formed a new council consisting of industry, labour, U.S.-relations expertise and government voices to advance the province鈥檚 interests in the softwood lumber dispute.

The province says the new council will provide 鈥渞ecommendations on steps B.C. can take to eliminate the 14.4 per cent softwood lumber duties鈥� and held its first meeting on Jan. 30.

鈥淭he U.S. has imposed unjustified softwood lumber duties on Canada for years, and we anticipate that they will likely double before the end of this year,鈥� said B.C. Forests Minister Ravi Parmar in a statement. 鈥淏ringing this team together, I am ready to throw the full weight of B.C. in the ring to fight these duties.鈥�

In a later interview, Parmar said he had spoken to Dunmoyer鈥檚 group, and the discussion showed that many people in the U.S. understood tariffs would mean higher housing costs.

Parmar said he hoped to engage with lawmakers in California and North Carolina, a state hit hard by Hurricane Helene last fall, on the key role B.C. and Canadian lumber could play in rebuilding.

鈥淚t鈥檚 important for all Canadians and all British Columbians to know that 鈥� when President Trump talks about not needing our trees, he鈥檚 absolutely false,鈥� he said.

鈥淎nd you just have to look at California and North Carolina, two states that are going to be going through major rebuilds. They are going to rely on Canadian lumber 鈥� and it鈥檚 going to cost them more because of these duties and if a tariff were to be in place.鈥�

Dunmoyer said that even if the new tariffs were imposed, switching from Canadian wood to U.S. timber wouldn鈥檛 be any cheaper for California homebuilders.

He said the recent devastating wildfires in Southern California had accelerated already high demand for new housing, and Trump鈥檚 tariff threat could not have come at a worse time for the industry.

鈥淭he demand for housing before the fires was off the charts,鈥� Dunmoyer said. 鈥淲e have projects where we have 35 homes available and 500 people in a waiting list, but that was before the fires.

鈥淲ith the fires, it just increases that demand substantially. And the other thing, which is somewhat intuitive, is it increases the demand immediately so it鈥檚 not like a ramp-up. You鈥檝e got 15,000 displaced families who immediately need a home. And we don鈥檛 produce that many homes on a monthly basis in California to meet that demand alone.

鈥淭he timing is horrific. It鈥檚 horrible. It鈥檚 like, why would we add to the cost of housing when we desperately need more housing?鈥�

January鈥檚 wildfires around Los Angeles destroyed or damaged as many as 19,000 homes and other structures.