[ch65279]I believe that “test” or “experimental” bank notes issued by Bank of Canada won’t be seen for today's paper Journey series. Keep in mind that experimental notes were created solely for the purpose of testing a currency’s durability. This was last done with the Crow/Bouey EXA $1.00 test between 1984 and 1986. It may have been a factor in the BOC's decision to issue a $1.00 coin rather than a new 1986 Bird $1.00 paper note. Whatever the case, the banks tests or experiments are normally driven by a desire to test a resin, ink, or paper composition of a note. The last test occurred about 20 years ago.
There are a number of reasons why the BOC would have no interest in re-introducing an outdated procedure. If we consider recent innovations in today's printing technology, the lack of replacement note assignation, and perhaps (most importantly) economical historical factors, than it is a forgone conclusion that testing paper money is a thing of the past.
Printing technology has become more and more sophisticated. After the disastrous results of the 2001 $10.00 Journey so regularly counterfeited, the BOC became more preoccupied with a note’s security features. If the BOC were concerned about their currency's durability than they would surely not have issued the new 2005 $10 Journey with such flimsy paper. After just a few months of circulation most of the new $10 bill will have most of its ink worn off (along both sides of the holographic security strips). This a flaw well documented on CPMF.
The BOC did away with replacement note assignation (the “X” in the serial number) in the 1990's (years after the last test note). This meant that no special printing of replacement notes occurred. Instead, the bank took blocks of other ordinary notes to fill in the missing gaps where runs of defective notes needed to be replenished. Although “insert replacements” are fewer than regular issue, there’s nothing but their documented “discovery” (by brick hunters)- or their serial number ranges- that can designate them as “different” from any other note. The trend to make all notes cheap/equal flies in the face of logic --that the bank would actually issue a new edition of expensive test notes.
The likelihood that a test “range of notes” (within a prefix) seems doubtful. The only way to test a note’s durability is to recall the notes tested. How could tellers identify (and recall) a note with only specific serial number ranges as an indicator? The idea that tellers would have the time to check a list of serial number ranges rather than a prefix is ludicrous. What if they were to recall a certain prefix? The notion that bank tellers would be instructed to recall a note for testing purposes (period) almost seems absurd today.
Since the 1990's, the BOC has seemed indifferent to a note’s wear/durability. The Bird series were a much superior note to its successor (Journey). Paper quality has declined rather than improve. The shelf life of a Journey note could only be a source of embarrassment if the BOC were truly concerned about a note’s longevity. The trend has been to increase the security features while reduce the production costs of each note. When the bank wishes to use a new kind of paper/resin (or ink) it simply changes them rather than test them in large public trials. In fact, it would seem they are well aware of the current Journey series' deficiencies. No public tests are necessary, though its possible internal tests continue.
The only time we might see public test note trials re-emerge is if the BOC decides to become more environmentally accountable and end its current wasteful practice of producing cheap notes so easily destroyed in circulation. The reverse trend would be the introduction of polymer notes- which may indeed go through a number of limited tests or experimental editions. Then the note would likely have either a conspicuous prefix or, more likely, a sophisticated bar-code which could be scanned and tracked. While this would be in keeping with the bank's agenda to provide a safe SECURE currency, it would go against its current policy to produce cheap notes.
Incidently: it is not for lack of technological “know how” that the BOC doesn't issue polymerized bank notes. The BABN were one of the first companies to produce polymers. The policy not to employ a polymerized currency must be economically driven. Its presently so much cheaper (about 9 cents) to make a bank note, rather than the pricey (25 cents) per polymer note. The short term gain is rather near sighted, however. In the long run it would save the BOC a significant amount of money to turn to polymer.
By the time the BOC changes to polymer it is more than likely that a new series design will emerge. We will likely see a number of new security features as well. Given that a polymer note lasts up to twenty times as long as its paper counterpart... if the BOC does employ public trials, I'm sure they (or it) will undoubtedly be very brief and inconspicous.
James
Canadian Paper Money
