Posted 14 October 2008 - 12:14 AM
Posted 14 October 2008 - 04:39 AM
Governments tend not to solve problems, only to rearrange them....Ronald Reagan
The income tax has made more liars out of the American people than golf has.......Will Rogers
Posted 14 October 2008 - 08:04 AM
Posted 14 October 2008 - 05:06 PM
How do I use the pouch service?
You mail a letter to address for the mission.
How many stamps should I use if the letter will go to foreign countries?
Just enough to get it to Salt Lake City. You are not actually sending the letter to those countries you are sending the Letter to the church and then church takes them down to the country (or they ship them all down). Its suppose to be a better and more secure way of sending letters.
Does the pouch service work for all countries in which missions are served? Spain? Philippines? Peru?
I don’t know for sure. I think its mostly in the missions where mail isn’t that reliable. Some might have it, some might not, you have to check. Some might have it, but its probably faster to just mail it over seas (probably cost more), that’s up to you.
Basically, any info you have on the pouch service I would love to hear.
Now e-mail is the main way to communicate and its easier. I think the Church even set up e-mail for all the missions so they could filter it themselves but I don’t know if that every was up and running or not.
Posted 14 October 2008 - 05:08 PM
Posted 15 October 2008 - 10:45 AM
If we're going to be stupid about this, we're going to be stupid on my terms. -- my husband
Posted 24 June 2011 - 02:41 PM
Posted 26 June 2011 - 12:16 PM
I appreciate all of you who responded to qbnolivia. I, too, have wondered about sending letters via the pouch. What about the whole "tri-fold" thing and tape that I hear about? Do you address the actual letter inside the envelop that is being sent to SLC?
I don't know about any 'tri-fold' thing. I have been sending cards/letters with the stamped envelope on the outside and the card envelop inside. It's possible I could just send the card envelop to the pouch address by itself, but I'm paranoid. This way, there's still a sealed envelop (with address) inside if they have to open the mail. I was told they didn't, but who knows?
The people I'm writing to are in the States; I find it doesn't take long for mail to reach them. I've sent some packages and they get there in a timely manner. For the packages, I just put the pouch address on it and hope for the best. I guess it's not like Customs is going to open them at the border and shake them out for contraband.
Email seems ok for quick stuff, but I'm sure they also like a nice letter or card that they can take pack to their apartment and read. They only have so much time on the computers on P-Day.
Posted 27 June 2011 - 02:05 PM
We have a couple of missionaries from our ward that are in pouch-mail-only areas. The bishopric has referred us to this site to read up on the pouch regulations. It explains the whole tri-fold issue. Worked well for us so far.
Thanks for the link. I found this part interesting:
The pouch system has been a reliable source of providing mail service to missionaries in 38 countries where local postal systems were often unreliable.
Success of the pouch system has been attributed to its carriers - a single missionary companionship known by Butch and Sundance.
"We've been at this some years," said Sundance, "and we find it's best when people follow the rules. They think they're performing a great service to their missionaries when they send cookies and cash and other gifts, but they're really putting the whole system at risk." Sundance cited increased interest from banditos when such things were included.
In recent years, letters to missionaries occasionally included cash and other sensitive material such as medications, and often printed pictures.
When asked for additional comment Butch didn't refuse, but could best be described as glowering.
Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: letters, mail, missionary work, pouch
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users