Hard to say. If you wintered in Winnipeg, AWD certainly would not be a waste. It sounds like you don't have much need for AWD, or snow tires for that matter. It also sounds like you do a lot of mileage, which biases the choice toward not having AWD.
Most small suv's are normally fwd and engage the back wheels when they detect slippage of the front drive wheels. The positive aspect of this is just what it does, the negative aspect is that you basically have to lose control to some extent before the AWD engages. And I have never seen an explanation of how the system knows to revert to fwd.
Usually these systems allow you to lock them in 4wd. IF this configuration is truly AWD with some slippage allowed in the system, then great. You can just shift them into 4wd/AWD when you want. Best of both worlds and all that. But, if "locking" means a non-slipping connection between front and back end, you can't use it locked on bare dry pavement. On bare roads with patches of ice or snow, this is kind of useless. And on corners at highway speeds on slippery surfaces you will be more likely to slide wheels and lose control than in 2wd alone.
The Grand Vitara and Forester normally are always in AWD. Yes, this costs some mileage. I look at it this way: AWD is fundamentally more sure-footed than any other configuration. Besides snowy/icy roads, this also means much better control on gravel, sand and wet roads. At some point, this has to translate into fewer accidents, which, to stretch the point, amounts to an effective dollar savings because of fewer wrecked cars to fix or replace. And energy(=fuel) savings also. Not to mention personal injury.
If mileage remains a concern, something like the X-Trail, unfortunately no longer sold in Canada, would be a good choice. Normally fwd with slip&grip, also configurable to AWD, and locked 4x4 modes.
