Submarine Cables:

Marine communications is one of the fastest growing areas of ocean technology worldwide. Canada's seabed is being used increasingly for the laying of submarine fibre-optic telecommunications cables to all parts of the globe. Current estimates are that 65 percent of all international telecommunications traffic, such as telephone, e-mail, e-commerce, and internet service, is carried by these extensive networks of high-speed submarine cables, with a global value of about US$1 trillion per year. Owing to their lower cost and longer lifespan, submarine fibre-optic cables have now largely taken over from satellites as the principal means of delivering international telecommunications traffic.

In order to continue to benefit from the important services provided by the submarine cable industry, Canada will need to address conflicts that have arisen with other ocean users, particularly the fishing industry. This requires collaboration in planning and routing of cables, as well as cooperation in the maintenance and protection of cables in areas of multiple use.

This article provides a snapshot of the international submarine cable industry, with a particular focus on the Canadian context. An overview of the industry and its development leads into some considerations regarding interactions with other ocean uses and implications for ocean planning, development and management. The cable industry will also be looked at in the context of maritime security, broadly defined.

The Submarine Cable Industry

Although it is often considered a "high-tech" ocean activity, the submarine cable industry has actually been around for about 150 years. Undersea cable technology has evolved through several distinct phases: the submarine telegraph cable era of the mid-to-late-1800s; the transoceanic telephone cable in the mid-1950s; and the lightweight fibre-optic submarine cable of the 1980s to present.

The use of terrestrial communications cables began with the invention of the telegraph by Samuel Morse in 1832. The era of submarine telegraph cables was inaugurated in 1850 with the laying of a cable in the English Channel between Dover and Calais. The growing pains began almost immediately, however, when a curious fisherman, thinking he had discovered a new species of seaweed, cut the cable a few days after it began to function! In 1858, Newfoundland and Ireland were connected by telegraph cable, although it was short-lived as well. In 1866, the converted passenger steamship Great Eastern (the largest ship ever constructed to that time) laid the first successful trans-Atlantic cable. Over the next 90 years, more than 450,000 nm (nautical miles) of telegraph cables were laid globally.

The first major submarine telephone cable was laid between Key West, Florida and Havana, Cuba in 1950, about 74 years after the invention of the telephone by Alexander Graham Bell. In 1956, Britain, Canada and the US collaborated on the first trans-Atlantic telephone cable (TAT-1), which consisted of 48 circuits and had repeaters every 37.5 nm for signal attenuation. These cables were constructed of a copper coaxial design and were known as analogue cables. Refinements in coaxial analogue technology enabled the development of cables with capacities of 4000 circuits by 1983. Prior to the advent of fibre-optic cables in 1988, 122,000 nm of analogue submarine cable, with a capacity of 155,000 voice circuits, were installed worldwide.

The first trans-Atlantic fibre-optic cable, TAT-8, was completed in 1988 by a consortium of 29 North American and European owners. Between 1988 and 1991, 88 undersea fibre-optic cables, extending 73,000 km and with an investment cost of US$4.2 billion, were in place. This equaled the total investment in submarine cables during the previous 30 years. By the end of 1994, 60 countries boasted submarine fibre-optic connectivity, and in 1998, 129 countries were connected. By 1997, the total investment in undersea fibre-optic cable systems had risen to about US$20 billion. Today there are 228,958 miles of fibre-optic cable on the seabed, enough to encircle the Earth almost ten times. This figure does not include the US$14 billion Project Oxygen, which will add another 200,000 miles of cable with landing points in 175 countries.

The tremendous growth in high-capacity submarine fibre-optic cables during the last decade has boosted traffic capacity on international routes to an unprecedented level and has made the cost of carrying international traffic almost negligible. The transmission capacity of fibre-optic cables has increased by orders of millions and the newest trans-Atlantic cable can handle 2.4 million voice conversations at one time. With many more high profile projects now underway, including Project Oxygen, Global Crossing, and FLAG (Fibre-Optic Link Around the Globe), analysts predict that by 2003 more than US$56 billion will be invested in the fibre-optic undersea market, with about a million route kilometres in place. Most of this projected revenue will be concentrated in the Asia-Pacific region, involving both long-haul, transoceanic repeatered routes, and an increasing number of short-haul, interregional systems utilizing high-capacity festoon systems. The top five owners of international submarine fibre-optic cables are AT&T, MCI, Teleglobe Canada, BT, and Sprint.

The Legal Regime

The first piece of international law to address submarine cables was the 1884 Convention for the Protection of Submarine Cables. This agreement is still in force today and has provisions to ensure the safety of cable repairs and prevent interference with and from other ocean uses. Customary international law as well as the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea defines the right to lay cables on the seabed as one of the "freedoms of the high seas" (Article 87). As with most other activities, the Convention calls for the application of flag state laws and regulations for the protection of cables in the high seas. Reference to the high seas freedom to lay cables in the EEZ is made in Article 58, but this freedom is granted only in so far as it is compatible with other provisions of the Convention. However, in view of the growing intensification and diversification of ocean uses, these "freedoms" may need to be re-examined. Increasing risks of interference with other cables and pipelines and resource uses such as fishing, oil and gas exploration and exploitation, and ocean mining, call into question the "freedom to lay cables". Cable companies are aware of the risks and, before laying cables, they spend at least one year on seabed bathymetric and sediment surveys to plan cable routing to avoid underwater earthquake faults, munitions dumps, canyons, shipping routes, and fishing gear impacted seabed. As activities on the seabed increase, additional sites may have to be avoided for environmental sensitivity reasons or for conflict avoidance with resource-based activities.

In cases of conflict between submarine cables and other ocean uses, state practice appears to favour the submarine cable industry rights (e.g., New Zealand, United States) and often provides for severe penalties for damaging cables.

In Canadian waters, federal regulation of submarine cable can be divided into two time frames, essentially before a cable is laid, and after it is in place. A proponent for a domestic submarine cable in navigable waters must apply for a permit from the Coast Guard under the Navigable Waters Protection Act. If a permit is required (as opposed to an exemption), this triggers an environmental assessment under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA), which can include socio-economic considerations (although this is not guaranteed). Any conditions resulting from the environmental assessment can be incorporated into the permit and continue for the operating life of the cable. A proponent for an international cable (i.e., landing points outside of Canada) through Canadian waters must apply for a permit from Industry Canada under the International Submarine Cable Regulations of the Telecommunications Act. This process automatically triggers an environmental assessment under CEAA. In both cases, the location of the cable is communicated to shipping through Coast Guard Notices to Mariners and navigation charts provided by the Canadian Hydrographic Service. Depending on how the cable is laid (buried or on bottom), an authorization under the Fisheries Act for alteration of fish habitat may be required, and in cases of cable burial, the ocean dumping provisions of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act can be triggered. It should be noted that in most cases, the laying and operation of submarine cables is a relatively benign use of the seabed, and most environmental concerns can be addressed effectively.

After the cable is in place, any conditions resulting from the environmental assessment that have been incorporated into the license or permit continue to apply to the holder of the license or permit. However, subsequent interactions between cable operations and other ocean activities are not specifically addressed within the myriad of oceans-related legislation in Canada. With ever increasing potential for conflict between cables and other ocean activities, such as fishing and shipping, the legal liability situation is not clear and has to date been based on civil liability with respect to private property (i.e., private law governing relations between private citizens). There are several on-going cases in Canada being dealt with in this manner, one involving a merchant ship that accidentally damaged a cable with its anchor in the approaches to Halifax, and the other involving a fishing vessel that damaged a cable with its gear on the Scotian Shelf off Nova Scotia.

Cables on the Scotian Shelf: A Challenge for Multiple Ocean Use

The Scotian Shelf is a busy place these days. Multiple ocean uses include fishing, shipping, defence operations, oil and gas development, science and research, recreation and tourism, a potential marine minerals industry, and, of course, submarine telecommunications cables. There are currently six active submarine cables on the Scotian Shelf, as well as the planned billion dollar trans-Atlantic fibre-optic cable-the Hibernia Project-linking Boston, Halifax, Dublin and Liverpool by spring 2001.

The local fishing industry has expressed concerns about interactions with submarine cables off Nova Scotia's coast. Many questions have been raised concerning regulatory aspects of submarine cables, planning processes for routing and burial of cables, and interactions with other ocean users. The planned re-commissioning and diversion of an abandoned cable to Sable Island and the Cohasset offshore oil production facility precipitated these concerns. The fishing industry is particularly concerned about the loss of fishing areas where exclusion zones are claimed and the potential threat of legal liability for damage to cables. The cable company involved advertised a 2-nm exclusion zone along cable routes for fishing. Although there is no legal basis for this claim, there is a legal basis for liability from wilful and/or negligent damage to cables. Effective and satisfactory consultation between cable companies and the fishing industry is generally lacking.

In the case of the planned Hibernia cable, however, interaction between the cable proponent and fishing industry representatives has been more proactive. Based on lessons learned from other parts of the world, including recent agreements between the fishing industry and several cable companies in Oregon, the two sides have worked together in planning and adjusting cable routes, and are negotiating an agreement to cover compensation for lost and damaged gear, waivers for legal liability for damage to cables, consultation/dispute resolution procedures and, possibly, financial compensation (e.g., fisheries enhancement funds) for lost fishing access. Although the exact nature of such an agreement is yet to be determined, a satisfactory agreement will have to be in place before a permit is issued by Industry Canada and its federal regulatory partners (i.e., Fisheries and Oceans, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency).

Although it has been the fishing versus cable issue that has received attention, there are broader oceans management issues involved here. The 1997 Oceans Act mandates the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans to develop and implement plans for the integrated management of all activities and measures affecting Canada's coastal and marine ecosystems. As part of this mandate, the Eastern Scotian Shelf Integrated Management Project was initiated in late 1998 to develop a collaborative oceans management plan for the offshore area between Halifax and the Laurentian Channel. Interaction of cable and fishing operations is an example of user conflict that needs to be addressed through the development of integrated management plans for coastal and ocean areas. Oceans management is about balanced decision-making regarding the use of ocean space. Under an oceans management plan for the eastern Scotian Shelf, both the fishing industry and the submarine cable industry would be partners in the on-going planning process, along with all other users and interests.

Ocean-use planning concepts and tools such as area-based management and zonation could be used to address this particular issue, and multiple ocean use generally. For example, the concept of a corridor for all future submarine cables across the Scotian Shelf, originally proposed by the fishing industry, could be considered. Whatever mechanism is used to resolve and avoid user conflict, the bottom line is that it must be achieved collaboratively, with consideration for all interests involved. The eastern Scotian Shelf is an ideal test case for the implementation of the Oceans Act, with cables and fishing interactions being one of many oceans management issues in the region.

Conclusion and Maritime Security Implications

The rapidly developing submarine fibre-optic cable industry has a large impact on global marine commerce. Risks to cables exist from anthropogenic and natural causes, making it imperative that the economic security of global cable networks be maintained through adequate protection measures. Disruptions to the integrity of submarine cable systems potentially cost cable companies millions of dollars in cable repairs and lost revenues from e-commerce and telecommunications. Cooperation from the fishing industry and other ocean users will help minimize the risks of interference.

There are a number of important issues related to the security of submarine cables. Given the fact that most military communications still occur via satellite technology, to what extent will military forces utilize submarine fibre-optic cables in the future? In view of the historic, albeit changing role played by navies in protecting seaborne maritime commerce and shipping, what role can the navy play in protecting the equally valuable e-commerce via global cable networks? It is suggested that while operating in a constabulary role on the oceans, naval protection of commercially owned submarine cables might fulfill the important functions of maintaining the economic component of maritime security and assisting in the complex task of oceans management. In essence, fibre-optic cable networks are a new sea line of communication with important implications for global maritime security. When examining the role of navies and military forces in protecting submarine cables, both the physical security of the cable infrastructures and the "virtual" security (i.e., information warfare) of the commerce and information flowing through cables must be considered.

The website of the International Cable Protection Committee (ICPC) contains a wealth of information for those interested in learning more about the submarine cable industry.

Glen Herbert and Scott Coffen-Smout work with the Oceans Act Coordination Office, Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Maritimes Region on the Eastern Scotian Shelf Integrated Management Project. Scott is also assistant editor of the Ocean Yearbook and Glen is a contributing editor with Maritime Affairs for oceans and shipping.

PHOTO CAPTION: Specialized cableships are used for laying and repairing fibre-optic cables.