DAWSON CREEK, B.C. - A long-awaited feasibility study examining Dawson Creek’s future water supply needs has narrowed a lengthy list of potential options to four, while ruling out groundwater and two Murray River alternatives as priority sources moving forward.
The findings were presented to Dawson Creek council this week as part of Phase 1 of the City’s Water Supply System Project.
The process was launched to address long-term concerns about drought, climate change, population growth and the community’s reliance on a single water source.
City staff say the study brings together more than 20 technical reports and assessments completed throughout 2026, examining everything from future water demand and climate impacts to source water quality, infrastructure requirements and long-term costs.
Four options remain under consideration
Following the completion of the study, staff have identified four options for future council discussion:
- Kiskatinaw River (status quo)
- Peace River (Clayhurst)
- Peace River (Taylor)
- Pine River
Meanwhile, the Murray River, Murray River South and groundwater as a primary municipal water source are no longer being prioritized.
Staff emphasized that Phase 1 was not intended to select a preferred water source. Instead, the purpose was to reduce uncertainty, answer technical questions and narrow the number of alternatives requiring further evaluation.
A follow-up report expected at a future council meeting will outline recommendations on possible next steps and future project phases.
Water demand expected to grow significantly
The study projects Dawson Creek’s average daily water demand will increase from just over 6,000 cubic metres per day today to roughly 10,400 cubic metres per day by 2075.
Maximum daily demand is expected to reach approximately 18,300 cubic metres per day.
Population projections reviewed as part of the study estimate the broader Dawson Creek area could grow from about 20,000 residents today to between 23,000 and 40,000 people by 2075, depending on future economic and development conditions.
The report concludes that while conservation efforts remain important, they are unlikely on their own to address the long-term challenges associated with growth, climate change and recurring drought conditions.
Groundwater largely ruled out
Groundwater has been a frequent topic during public discussions surrounding Dawson Creek’s water future, but the study found it is unlikely to meet the City’s long-term needs.
Researchers examined 21 aquifers and reviewed more than 700 registered groundwater wells.
The assessment found roughly 92 per cent of reported wells produced less than three litres per second, far below the volumes required to meet future municipal demand.
While groundwater could potentially play a supplemental or emergency role in future water planning, staff concluded it is “highly unlikely” to serve as Dawson Creek’s primary municipal water source.
Price tag into hundreds of millions
The feasibility study also provides the first detailed comparison of planning-level costs for each option.
The current Kiskatinaw River system would require an estimated $55 million in capital investments over the next two decades, with a lifecycle cost of approximately $85 million.
Among the new source alternatives, the Pine River option carries the lowest estimated capital cost at roughly $194 million, while the Peace River Clayhurst and Taylor options are estimated at approximately $255 million and $272 million respectively.
Lifecycle costs are estimated at approximately $236 million for Pine River, $280 million for Peace River Clayhurst and $314 million for Peace River Taylor.
The report notes those figures are preliminary Class D estimates and include significant contingency, engineering and inflation allowances.
No preferred option selected
The study narrows the field considerably, staff say there is no single “best” solution. Each option presents different trade-offs involving cost, climate resilience, reliability and long-term certainty.
Future phases of the project are expected to focus on reducing remaining uncertainty, refining costs, evaluating funding opportunities and exploring potential partnerships with Indigenous Nations, other governments and regional stakeholders.
City staff are expected to return to council with recommendations on how the project should proceed following discussion of the Phase 1 findings.