Hard Questions, Honest Answers: Follow-Up to the Sheep River Report

Introductory Paragraph:

When we released the Sheep River Water Report, we hoped it would start a conversation—and it has. The feedback has been both heartening and thought-provoking. Many readers expressed gratitude for a deep look into our watershed’s realities, while others raised pressing concerns about development pressure, infrastructure capacity, and affordability. These are exactly the kinds of questions we need to ask—and answer—together. This post is a follow-up, an opportunity to dig deeper into the issues raised and begin charting a way forward.

Section 1 – Development and Water Licences: The Okotoks Example

A number of comments asked why our town doesn’t simply require developers to bring their own water licence to the table—like Okotoks once did. It’s a fair question, and one that reveals just how much community-led planning can shape growth.

In the early 2000s, Okotoks famously capped its population at what its existing water licence from the Sheep River could support. For years, this “closed growth boundary” model allowed the town to grow sustainably within its ecological limits. Developers had to prove that water was available—or growth didn’t happen.

Eventually, Okotoks expanded its boundaries and infrastructure through a regional water pipeline from the Bow River, trading independence for growth. But the principle stands: communities can use water access as a growth control tool—if they have the political will and policy structure in place.

Our town could take a similar approach. Requiring developer-secured water access, or linking approvals to demonstrated capacity, would be a bold but lawful way to prevent unsustainable development. It would also protect existing residents from footing the bill for infrastructure overshoot.

Section 2 – Storage, Treatment, and the Infrastructure Squeeze

One of the most consistent concerns raised by readers was infrastructure capacity—especially our ability to store, treat, and deliver clean water and safely manage wastewater. These concerns are real and growing more urgent by the year.

Potable Water Supply (SRRUC):
The Sheep River Regional Utility Corporation (SRRUC) provides potable water to our community, but its treatment and storage capacity—like its licence—has limits. As growth continues, we are already brushing up against these limits, particularly during peak usage periods in summer. Water restrictions are no longer just precautionary—they are a response to real strain on supply.

Storage Matters:
Water licences are only part of the equation. Even if water is available on paper, we still need adequate storage to buffer peak demand, especially in fire season or during drought. Expanding treated water reservoirs is expensive and often delayed by red tape or competing municipal priorities.

Wastewater Treatment (Westend):
On the wastewater side, the Westend facility has undergone a $20 million upgrade to meet both projected growth and new federal discharge standards. These upgrades were necessary—but expensive. And while they may accommodate near-term development, they do not remove the cost burden from existing ratepayers, many of whom are already concerned about rising utility bills.

Simply put, we are approaching the threshold where growth without infrastructure planning becomes financially and environmentally reckless. We need a clear and public infrastructure roadmap that answers:

• How much capacity we have,
• What expansion will cost, and
• Who will pay.

Section 3 – Affordability, Water Markets, and the Future We Can Afford

One of the most heartfelt concerns shared in the comments was this: “I fear for the future… it may be that many of us just won’t be able to afford to live here any longer.” This fear is valid—and it highlights why water policy isn’t just about pipes and permits. It’s about people.

Our water and wastewater infrastructure costs are already rising. Rate increases cover basic maintenance, treatment upgrades, and expansion. As we push infrastructure to its limits, the price of growth isn’t being paid by developers—it’s being passed on to residents. If we don’t intervene with smart planning, that cost will only climb.

Some have suggested a market-based solution: requiring developers to secure their own water licence for additional consumption. While this idea has merit, it’s important to understand the system we’re working within.

In Alberta, water is a licensed resource, not a public right. Transferring water licences is legally possible but can be expensive, bureaucratic, and competitive. Water allocations are prioritized by seniority (“first in time, first in right”), and transfers must go through an approval process that assesses environmental and basin-wide impacts.

According to Alberta Environment & Protected Areas, transfers can include both the full licence and partial allocations. But as scarcity grows, so do costs. The Canadian Water Portal notes that Alberta’s water market is one of the most active in Canada, yet still limited in availability and transparency.

All this to say: a policy requiring developers to bring water is possible—but it’s not simple. It must be paired with clear expectations, supportive regulation, and community buy-in. Otherwise, we’re simply shifting cost and complexity from public to private hands, without solving the deeper problem: we need to live within our watershed’s means.

Section 4 – Moving Forward: Smarter Growth, Stronger Policy, Local Control

If there’s one thing the Sheep River teaches us, it’s that every system has a carrying capacity. Whether it’s water supply, wastewater treatment, or community affordability—there are limits we must plan around, not plow through.

So where do we go from here?

1. Adopt a “Growth Within Capacity” Principle
Just as Okotoks once did, our town could establish a formal policy that no development proceeds without demonstrated, sustainable water supply and infrastructure capacity. This doesn’t mean stopping growth—it means managing it wisely.

2. Increase Transparency Around Infrastructure Planning
Many residents don’t know how much capacity SRRUC or Westend actually has, what upgrades are needed, or what they cost. By releasing clear, digestible information—charts, dashboards, and plain-language reports—we can rebuild trust and invite informed input.

3. Establish Developer Responsibility Protocols
Development agreements can require cost-sharing for infrastructure expansion, water offsets (such as rainwater harvesting or greywater reuse), or even water licence contributions. Other municipalities have used these tools effectively—why not us?

4. Explore a Local Water Resilience Strategy
Beyond just reacting to growth, we could plan for long-term water resilience: expanding storage, diversifying supply (e.g. rainwater, stormwater reuse), restoring wetlands, and embracing low-water landscaping. These investments reduce pressure and increase independence.

5. Protect the Affordability of Essential Services
Water is life. And while infrastructure has real costs, those costs must be balanced against residents’ ability to pay. Town council, administration, and citizens all have a role in demanding fair, transparent, and forward-thinking budgeting that supports people—not just growth.

Call to Action – Let’s Keep the Conversation Going

The Sheep River Water Report was never meant to be the final word. It’s a beginning. If these issues matter to you—if you’re worried about our water, our costs, or our community’s future—get involved.

• Attend Council meetings and ask questions.
• Support water-wise policies and projects.
• Talk to your neighbours.
• Demand accountability and transparency.

We still have choices. But the longer we wait to make them, the fewer we’ll have.