Gary Stairs on the Future of Working Harbour Intelligence

Working harbours form the operational backbone of coastal economies, maritime supply chains, and commercial fisheries. Yet many waterfront operators face aging infrastructure, volatile weather, and fragmented operational data. Without reliable, real-time insights, small issues can quickly turn into costly damage or critical safety hazards. Bridging the gap between physical harbour facilities and modern digital oversight has become essential for long-term coastal resilience.

Stellar Futures Inc. is developing practical intelligence tools to help harbour managers anticipate risks before they cause losses. In this Executive Q&A, Gary Stairs, Founder and CEO of Stellar Futures, discusses the company’s presentation to the British Columbia Broadband Forum, the role of connectivity in maritime monitoring, and proposals for collaborative harbour networks on Canada’s Pacific and Atlantic coasts.

Q: What motivated Stellar Futures to present its working-harbour intelligence model to the British Columbia Broadband Forum, and how does reliable connectivity fit into your overall vision?

Gary Stairs: We see connectivity as essential infrastructure for safer working harbours. The British Columbia Broadband Forum brought us into a conversation with people who understand networks, public infrastructure and the challenge of serving coastal communities. We wanted to show how that connectivity could support practical decisions on the waterfront.

Our purpose at Stellar Futures is to make harbours, boats and workers safer. Reliable broadband can connect local observations, environmental information and harbour records so that managers have a clearer picture of changing conditions. The design also needs to account for interruptions. Depending on the site, that could mean processing some information locally, retaining records until a connection returns, and providing backup communications. A harbour’s ability to recognize a developing problem should not depend entirely on an uninterrupted internet connection.

Q: Could you walk us through the core capabilities of Harbour Atlas™ and Harbour Sentinel™, and explain how they work together to protect waterfront infrastructure?

Gary Stairs: Harbour Atlas is being developed to help a harbour understand what it has, what condition it is in and what needs attention. That includes asset records, inspections, maintenance history, local observations and gaps in the available evidence. The aim is to help managers prioritize work and prepare stronger capital investment and funding submissions.

Harbour Sentinel is the active intelligence component. Its intended role is to bring together relevant sensor information, weather and water conditions, vessel information and local reports to help identify developing risks and support timely action. Capabilities would depend on the equipment and services selected for each harbour.

We are using modern development tools and AI-assisted engineering to build working capabilities in weeks rather than months, with code review and testing built into the process. This helps us move quickly while keeping quality and reliability central to the development process. 

Together, they connect longer-term infrastructure planning with day-to-day operations. A recurring flooding problem, for example, could prompt an operational warning through Sentinel while the accumulated evidence helps Atlas document the need for an infrastructure improvement. We are seeking support to complete development and test these capabilities through practical pilots.

Q: What would a regional demonstration project look like on the Pacific coast, and what specific operational problems are you looking to solve first for local harbour authorities?

Gary Stairs: I would start with a small group of willing harbours and a defined demonstration of approximately 90 days, with preparation and evaluation around it. Harbour authorities and participating First Nations would help choose the locations and the problems to address. The scope would reflect local priorities, available connectivity and the information already being collected.

The first tasks should be concrete: documenting vulnerable assets, improving awareness of hazardous conditions, and making it easier to record incidents and maintenance needs. We could then test whether useful information reaches the right person early enough to act.

We would agree on measures before the pilot begins, including system availability, warning usefulness, false alarms, staff time and the quality of maintenance records. A short demonstration can establish usability and operational value; longer observation would be needed to substantiate reductions in losses. Expansion should follow that evidence and the participants’ assessment of its value.

Q: How does the proposed Pacific Fisheries Harbour Intelligence Network and Hub balance data sharing among First Nations, municipalities, and agencies while safeguarding local autonomy and sensitive operational information?

Gary Stairs: The proposed Pacific Fisheries Harbour Intelligence Network and Hub should be built with the participating communities and harbour authorities. Local autonomy needs to be reflected in the governance from the beginning. Participants should help determine what is collected, who can access it and which information can be shared for an agreed purpose.

We would propose clear agreements, access based on each person’s responsibilities, and records of access and changes. A regional view might show broad operating conditions or infrastructure needs while keeping commercially sensitive vessel information and detailed local records restricted. Emergency information sharing would need agreed procedures and authorized recipients.

First Nations must have a substantive role in decisions affecting their data and communities, including the applicable principles of Indigenous data sovereignty. Those arrangements need to be developed with each participating Nation. The hub’s value would come from useful coordination and trusted information exchange, with local knowledge and authority respected throughout.

Q: Looking at both the Pacific initiative and your Atlantic concepts, what are the primary operational and economic benefits of creating aligned harbour intelligence networks across both coasts?

Gary Stairs: A network gives neighbouring harbours a way to understand shared conditions and coordinate their responses. A storm, communications failure or damaged wharf can affect several communities. A regional picture could help operators identify constraints, coordinate access to services and direct attention where it is most needed.

Economically, the opportunity is to reduce avoidable disruption and make better use of maintenance and capital budgets. Better records can help distinguish an immediate repair from a longer-term upgrade and support a clearer funding case. Shared technical services could also make capabilities more affordable for smaller harbours.

Across the Pacific and Atlantic coasts, we could share methods and lessons while adapting to different fisheries, infrastructure and governance arrangements. We would measure benefits through pilots rather than promise a fixed return in advance. My ambition is that every Canadian working harbour can anticipate tomorrow’s risks before they become tomorrow’s losses.

Harbour intelligence represents a vital evolution in maritime management, transforming reactive maintenance into proactive risk mitigation. By combining asset condition tracking with real-time environmental data and dependable digital connectivity, waterfront operators can safeguard essential community assets, protect working crews, and build data-driven cases for capital investment.

The proposed networks would bring harbour operators, Indigenous leadership and public agencies together around locally defined needs. Demonstrations would test how shared information and dependable connectivity can support safer operations and better infrastructure decisions.

To learn more, visit: https://stellarfutures.ca/