Didn't say there was any justification for your claims of inflated numbers, if they prove to be confirmed. All well and good to be watchdogs, but you didn't answer my question: Given the fact that the politicians want to see visitation numbers as part of their "results-driven" budget process, how would your group (or anyone else) propose to collect those numbers more accurately - and what would that improved system cost? That process is not as easy as it sounds in a park that's open 24-7 and has no entrance stations and multiple entrances.

Well, I'll tell you one thing we are doing and it is quite laborious and time intensive.  We are checking the numbers of alleged backcountry reservations in the Smokies through their reservations system comparing them with purported revenue from the overnight stay.  And of course, the NPS is trying not to give us that information(on the revenue).  We are also tallying the data from their own system and comparing it with the actual numbers they show on the IRMA website.  Again, they don't match.   When we sued them over the backcountry tax (because that is what it is when you charge a taxpayer to use public land and provide no amenities) they changed their justifications for the tax multiple times.  We have learned that you have to listen with careful ears to see through the manipulation of data.  When you call them out, they just change the assertions.   This is John Jarvis NPS at work.  You know, the guy whose brother lobbied the NPS?

And the sad part is, many of our group, like myself, are park volunteers.  When we are not doing trail maintenance or stream counts or trail reports, we do this.  Something is wrong with the NPS culture and the change needs to come from within.

Not an answer, backpacker. He asked you how you would propose to do it better and all you did was again describe the alleged deceit of the NPS and your confrontational situation.

rick, I just explained how we ARE doing it better, rather than armchair sniping at folks that are actually doing something for parks why don't you get out and make some kind of effort? You are a great sidelines critic but all you NPS folks take things personally.  It is the high level bureaucrats that we are calling to task.  Not low level NPS folk.  You should be ashamed of your wife's agency instead of chairing the "NPS can do no wrong" brigade.

Thanks for the reply SmokiesBackpacker. That at least clarifies that your complaints about the park "cooking the books" for visitation numbers applies to your ongoing project about backcountry reservations and fees. The story above deals primarily with the "bigger picture" of park visitation; as you yourself have indicated, backcountry use by overnight campers is such a tiny fraction of total use at the Smokies that those numbers, whether high or low, aren't really a factor in total park visitation numbers.

If your group can prove that the park's numbers for backcountry use are wrong, more power to you.

I'm just tired of the "NPS can do no right" brigade. I've lived in this world long enough to know that there are good and bad everywhere, and that certainly includes the NPS. Of course visitation numbers are only going to be an approximate, just like reports of a movie's box office. In either case, however, they will be close enough to give enough of an idea of what's going on to make management decisions.

Rick B. 

Nicely said.

I wonder what caused the Blue Ridge Parkway to slip to a much lower visitation than the previously cited number at about 19 million?  Of course, I have never really believed this high visitation citation.  On the other hand, why is the visitation for the George Washington Parkway so low, say compared to the Blue Ridge Parkway?  Perhaps an equation is employed that subtracts out commuter traffic?  

Does the high number quoted for the Golden Gate National Recreation Area include traffic across the Golden Gate Bridge?

Certainly the new free pass to all 4th graders and their families will boost park visitation even further.