US: Covers: 21st Century

Many thanks for your post, JeffS

I don't see any reason why we can't have a thread on US Covers in the 21st Century....  Do you want to start one, or were you thinking that some of the posts already existing in the more general thread should be culled out of there and the new thread created that way?

If it's the former, then it's up to you, my friend!  If it's the latter, just let me know, and I will take a closer look at it.

I think that's a great idea, JeffS. As someone with an interest in modern/contemporary stamps and covers, I think 21st century postal history is more than worth a topic of its own!

To a typical postal history collector this cover likely has little going for it. The use of long-obsolete stamps is not a desirable franking. It lacks a proper postmark tying the stamps to the cover. So why the attention?

I have read here that this type of inkjet (spray-on) postmark was intended for meter-franked covers. It also activates when non-current-tagged stamps are used, why I don't know.

However it is an example of how mail is currently processed with such an obsolete franking. The 8c Magsaysay stamp is barely tied by the S. SUBURBAN IL inkjet, and the bottom Murrow stamp tied by the 7IP code sorting bars at the bottom. And as it is a tidy small cover, I think it worth my while to toss it in my keepers box. 

JeffS ,

I received this "bodybag" last week. The reverse includes a pre-printed apology from "YOUR POSTMASTER" for the inadvertent damage incurred in handling the enclosed document.

Unlike your example, where damage existed, the enclosed content was in pristine, pre-mailing condition -- there was not a mark (or postmark) on it.

The enclosed postal card was an advertisement for stamp approvals. My assumption is that the seller bought my address from APS and had a connection with someone in his post office that allowed the use of the bodybag.

The enclosed postal card had the correct postage applied for a card sent by first-class mail (51¢) so the only loss to the USPS was the cost of the envelope which is likely far less than that of the Priority and Express mailers that he probably uses as stiffeners for his approval mailings.

In January of this year, 2023, my gardener wife ordered a packet of garlic (Allium sativum) seeds from a vendor in Sri Lanka. This shipment was intercepted by the US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, and the seeds seized for the stated reason on their form that it was "not authorized for entry" because a "Phyto-sanitary certificate was missing ." (See numbered items 4, 6, 7 and 15 on the form which should be clear.

Shown below is a copy of the form, as well as the front and back of the padded envelope which contained the seeds.

I note that the seller apparently misspelled the word "garlic" as "gralic." I have found "gralic" posted online but apparently those are misspellings as well.

Furthermore item 13 DISPOSITION states that "Prohibited material removed and destroyed."

I originally questioned if the CUSTOMS DECLARATION label is of Sri Lanka Origin or US customs. An online search revealed that CN22 identifies this as a US Customs Label designed for outbound mail that was used to identify it as being examined.  It was never filled in.  The opened envelope was simply sealed with transparent tape. Also the printed customs declaration on the reverse of the envelope has been filled in by the sender.

Although this originated in Sri Lanka, the interest really begins once it hits Kennedy International Airport.