The American Philatelist April 2020

Figure 3. The simplest form of barcode obliteration is to simply
mark through an improper barcode.
Figure 5. Many of the simplest barcode blockers are opaque
handstamped markings.
an additional ZIP label being applied. As a side note, the cover
also picked up a fantastic alphabetical (A-Z) sprayed-on
inkjet postmark in Cincinnati.
It is somewhat telling that both organizations had enough
problems with non-intended use of their preprinted envelopes
(with barcodes) that they created their own private
auxiliary markings to explain the problem. They definitely
were not alone, as I’ve seen a number of similar examples
over the years.
But what about other mail processing problems, such as
improper ZIP Codes applied by mailers or other mail material
that was undeliverable for various reasons? As greater
numbers of sectional centers and large offices began using
more automated equipment, a problem began to develop:
Without something to block out bad barcoded ZIPs, mail
pieces could cycle endlessly through automated equipment.
After all, automated equipment is incapable of reading
“pointing finger” handstamps, and most offices found it too
labor-intensive to hand mark-out the offending barcode on
each piece, as was done on the 1989 postal card shown in
Figure 3, where the bar code is crossed out and the auxiliary
marking added.
From roughly 1989–96 or so, many different types of
barcode blockers were employed so that mail could be properly
handled and delivered or returned. The majority of barcode
blockers I’ve seen were applied to undeliverable mail,
allowing items to be kicked out of automated equipment and
handled manually. These markings are of specific interest to
us this month (rather than entire covers, although there are
other interesting markings as well), and therefore only the
markings themselves will be shown in most of the following
illustrations.
Obviously, the most direct form of barcode blocker is
simple obliteration, such as has been done by a grease pen
marking and returned to sender handstamp, both shown in
Figure 4.
Figure 5 shows a group of blockers that are nothing
more than what appears to be pieces of inked rubber, some
salvaged from other handstamp devices, and others looking
more like bits of repurposed inner tubing. The marking
shown in Figure 6 integrates the plain obliteration with an
auxiliary marking as well.
Another style, represented by the group of markings
Figure 4. Examples of manual barcode blocking
accomplished with grease pencil (top) and an auxiliary
marking.
Figure 6. This barcode blocker integrates a message with a plain
obliteration.
APRIL 2020 / AMERICAN PHILATELIST 327