In the Beginning

NOISE TAS was originally created by Mr. Alan Churchill on 6th January 2001 with the aim of working towards achieving more efficient lawful reduction of repetitive, intrusive noise into residential environments. In late 1997, after retirement from the workforce, Mr. Churchill purchased a computer, took on a course in freelance journalism, and began writing articles for various outlets. To his dismay, he found that the level of noise around his home made it impossible to concentrate sufficiently to produce good work. Most of the noise seemed unnecessary, and obviously outside lawful limits.

Realizing that other citizens may be suffering from similar problems, Alan placed a small advertisement in "The Mercury" on 6 January 2001, in an endeavor to learn about the true extent of intrusive residential noise. Many replies came in from all parts of Tasmania. This was the birth of NOISE TAS.

Letter-writing to the local newspaper and various authorities began, with limited information and support available for distressed citizens. Early communications with government authorities revealed not only a strong resistance to "hear and understand", but a clear preference to remain ignorant, uncommunicative and unhelpful, despite existing noise protection laws and regulations.

Early reports were documented from telephone calls to Alan Churchill, and many respondents, fearful of reprisals if their details were made known, requested confidentiality. Case studies were typed and filed. Alan
maintained his efforts with the occasional support of two other noise sufferers.

In the previous month of December 2000, the Department of Primary Industries, Water and environment had advertised for public submissions prior to the drafting of a revised Noise Policy for Tasmania. Subsequently, Alan Churchill prepared a submission and attended the public forum held by that department.

In the early days of NOISE TAS, an application for a Crime and Violence Prevention Award was forwarded to Canberra. The application was unsuccessful. A NOISE TAS internet website was developed, using a donation received from Deidre Wilson, Alderman, Clarence Council. This was the first donation ever received by NOISE TAS. Occasional donations continued to be received.

Development

In July 2002, the present Hon. Secretary joined Alan to assist with setting up an office, organizing meetings, summarizing available research on the adverse health effects of noise, and preparing routine literature for replies and distribution to respondents, politicians and interested parties. It was felt that educational materials were necessary for dissemination to the general public in order to justify the objectives of NOISE TAS, and that increased feedback would result. Questionnaire forms were devised as the means of obtaining statistical data and developing a mailing list from which to perhaps undertake a membership drive at some appropriate time in the future.

Friends

Over time, NOISE TAS has developed co-operative relationships with various groups and organizations, with exchange of information assisting in the networking process. Increasingly, both political and non-political individuals are offering financial support, practical assistance, and encouragement.

Relationships with respected, qualified national and international noise reduction professionals have been established and maintained, including Eric Greenspoon's NoiseWatch (Canada), Quiet America, Valerie Weedon MBE, Secretary of the UK Noise Network, (who, along with Lehman College Professor Emerita Arline Bronzaft, (environmental psychologist presently serving her 3rd term on the New York City Board of Environment) wrote letters to Tasmania's Mercury newspaper during 2003,
criticizing the State's proposed Draft Environment Protection Policy). Dr Bronzaft was keynote speaker at the Australian Acoustical Society's conference in Brisbane approximately 18 years ago, and has maintained her interest in Australian noise pollution issues).

The NOISE TAS organization aroused considerable international interest, with congratulations and encouragement from noise groups everywhere. Interested parties indicated that, should Tasmania demonstrate the foresight to lead by coming up with an example of a modern, efficiently operating Noise Pollution Policy, particularly in regard to reduction of community noise, they may be able to study Tasmanian legislation as a "model" for their own towns and cities. Communications with the Belfast City Council resulted in receipt of their city's Noise Pollution Control Regulations. Communications with their staff continued.

The Office

Photocopying donor found. A bank account was opened with Island State Credit Union, the existing website upgraded, a new letterhead designed, together with opening of post office box and telephone book entry.

• Regular committee meetings began
• Noise Tas "Objectives" prepared
• Advertising leaflets prepared
• An application for permission to solicit for charitable donations approved by Justice Department.
• Communications were undertaken with the enHealth Council in
  regard to their report "Non-Auditory Health Effects of Noise".

There has been general acceptance that, until a substantial increase in bank balance is achieved, incidental costs such as telephone, internet, transport to and from meetings, monthly meeting room costs, telephone and postage, will be met by committee members.

Questionnaires

Returned questionnaire reports show that many citizens are using prescribed medications in order to achieve any semblance of normal daily life. The majority of respondents indicated fear of reprisals for complaining about noise, with some experiencing such retaliatins. Most reported that the lethargic, sometimes arrogant unwillingness of authorities (who are well-remunerated to carry out noise abatement responsibilities) have often trivialised their complaints, causing further deterioration in their state of well-being. (With the exception, in some cases, of police assistance). Many people reported feelings of further shock and violation when they find that those who are well remunerated to protect them, cannot or will not do so.

Questionnaire reports revealed perceived obstacles on the part of enforcement authorities effectively prevented solutions for complainants.

Reprisals

NOISE TAS researched and documented what is known as "reprisals factor", i.e. the terrible retaliations often experienced by citizens, whose only expectation has been that the soundscape of their living and relaxation quarters is lawfully freed from uninvited noise. Feedback from noise sufferers showed that retaliation, to either a small or large degree as "pay-back" for complaining, is the rule rather than the exception. It was found that literature produced by various authorities advises citizens to firstly try and resolve the problem themselves, but fails to warn of the possible dangers from attempting self-resolution. Local Government Association representatives told members of the September 2003 Noise Policy Review Panel that council officers are reluctant to attend to out-of-hours complaints due to officer safety issues. This admission confirmed NOISE TAS research and underlines the case for stronger noise control laws and enforcement thereof..

Unreasonable

The use of "subjective judgements" and what constitutes "nuisance" noise by noise control enforcement officers, and what is "unreasonable", combined with the difficulties in technical measurement of noise at the time it occurs, are clearly some of the handicaps to preventing swift, sure action, despite legislation which was originally intended to be accessed and to provide protection.

Expanding

By December 2002, the Noise Tas committee consisted of a persistently hard working steering committee of 3 people, with the backing of many strong supporters, and were constructively searching out some answers to help innocent suffering citizens, while putting in place potential strategies for the long haul ahead.

By December 2003, there are seven committee members, with four carrying the majority of the workload and in daily communications.

Incorporation

Plans are under way for NOISE TAS to become an incorporated body. The formal structure of the committee and constitution is yet to be decided. There have been no formal nominations or elections to positions.

Busy

December 2002. Production of the first newsletter undertaken. 50 newsletters were sent to various respondents and interested individuals. Duncan Kerr published a profile of the NOISE TAS organisation in his "Denison Report". Four committee members attended a meeting with the Tasmanian Greens and provided them with NOISE TAS research and draft submissions on the proposed new Noise Policy for Tasmania.

From December 2002 - late 2003, there was still neither time nor resources to engage in any focused drive to achieve financial memberships. It was intended that when the Steering Committee reached a minimum of approximately 5 active, participating members, larger projects such as a formal membership drive and incorporation could be undertaken.

June 2003. Website/computer volunteer joins NOISE TAS.

A second application for a Crime and Violence Prevention Award unsuccessful.

Statewide Noise...

Only due to the efforts of NOISE TAS is the research now emerging which shows that there is a burgeoning, sinister and serious environmental noise problem in relation to human health, in towns and cities across Tasmania.

Noise control in the State of Tasmania has been found to be fragmented, under-resourced, under-trained, under-recognised, uncoordinated: in short, it is a shambles which is exacerbating existing health problems and
causing elevated blood pressure, depression, sleep deprivation and other
health effects.

Whilst robust attention has been paid to other environmental issues in this State, until the advent of NOISE TAS, the noise pollution which affects citizens in every corner of Tasmania, every night and every day, has been neglected. The problem had escalated to the stage where blatant inaction of authorities has delivered an entrenched perception that some can inflict their noise onto others with impunity, and these people therefore dictate the acoustic environment of their neighbourhoods.

December 2003 Support for NOISE TAS continues to grow, with increasing community backing to continue to persist in liaising with government on behalf of persons affected by repetitive, intrusive residential noise.

During December, from approximately 200 questionnaires/reports to NOISE TAS a summary of (anonymous/disguised) confidential anecdotes, showing that Tasmanians are indeed suffering from unresolved noise problems, was prepared and delivered to appropriate politicians.

During 2003. Confidentiality was maintained, and has never been broken. (The 200 questionnaire responses were achieved from very limited exposure, with limited resources, and over approximately 9 months).

NOISE TAS did not actively advertise its existence, mainly becoming recognised through Alan's letters to The Mercury, interviews on radio and television, items in The Denison Report and Harry Quick's electoral newsletters.

It has been found that information which should be public knowledge, is quite difficult to be accessed by the general public.

All of the work continues on a voluntary basis.

Donations cover some of the costs, which include meeting with, supporting and providing information for affected citizens, telephone calls to distressed citizens and authorities, internet and email services, photocopying, stationery (large volumes), postage, post office box fee, advertising and telephone directory entry.

Volunteer committee members currently meet their own telephone, internet, stationery and travel costs.

NOISE TAS letters to "The Mercury" continue to be printed, and articles on noise pollution are published from time to time. Letters on noise pollution to "The Mercury" are appearing more often.

Communications continue with various politicians.

Preparation of submission in response to DPIWE's release of its draft Environmental Protection Policy (Noise) completed and lodged with Resource Planning and Development Commission.

NOISE TAS participated in International Noise Awareness Day (INAD) in April 2003 by providing media outlets with its Press Release, and two committee members were interviewed by Annie Warburton on ABC Radio. The Press Releases resulted in small articles in various newspapers.

Bayside Village News published an article entitled "There's a Nasty Noise Living Near you" in June 2003, and Alan was subsequently invited to write a regular column.

A visit to Allison Ritchie MLC resulted in her providing a written letter of support from NOISE TAS.

Hearings on the Draft Environment Protection Policy (Noise) were held on 1 September 2003 when Alan and Lindsay appeared before the Review Panel on behalf of Tasmanian citizens, to put the case for an improved draft policy.

The final New South Wales enHealth Report on "The Non-Auditory Health Effects of Noise" was endorsed in Hobart at their meeting late 2003.