What percent of visitors to LDS Historical Sites are non-LDS?

[Thinking]

As my wife and I travel, she makes it a point to visit LDS historical sites when we are close. Usually the guide will ask for a show of hands to indicate who is LDS or non-LDS. All of our visits have been 100% LDS. Surely there are non-LDS who have visited historical sites. Does anybody know the numbers or where to find them?

Thanks.

[Tacenda]

I know the temple grounds in SLC Utah is right up there with the favorite place to visit in Utah. Pretty sure there are many non LDS that visit.

[rongo]

I've had non-members at Church history sites in tours before, but I don't know how that could be quantified.

Right when I graduated, I rented motorhomes in Salt Lake. Primarily to German-speaking tourists through German, Austrian, and Swiss travel agencies, but there was some local business. The ultimate destinations from Salt Lake were usually Yellowstone or Arches/Moab, but every single one of the European parties headed first to Temple Square. Many asked for other Mormon  Sehenswürdigkeiten to see in Salt Lake, and I sent them to places like Pioneer Village or This Is the Place. Several also planned to see the Manti pageant (travel agencies gave lots of suggestions of things to do and see). So many asked for reading material about the Mormons, that I got a bunch of copies of Truth Restored, The Book of Mormon, and Testimony of the Prophet Joseph Smith in German, French, and Dutch to give them when they asked. It was a lot of fun to do effortless missionary work and answer questions from interested people.

 

[ksfisher]

My wife works for the church in a field connected with historical sites and visitors centers.  She feels that abou 85% of the visitors are LDS, but of course there is probably considerable varience from site to site.

[Okrahomer]

30 minutes ago, Thinking said:

As my wife and I travel, she makes it a point to visit LDS historical sites when we are close. Usually the guide will ask for a show of hands to indicate who is LDS or non-LDS. All of our visits have been 100% LDS. Surely there are non-LDS who have visited historical sites. Does anybody know the numbers or where to find them?

Thanks.

You might try this source which Is available in Google Books here.  The essay on page 225-242 (Touring Sacred History:  The Latter-day Saints and their Historical Sites) includes some estimates.

[Thinking]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

I know the temple grounds in SLC Utah is right up there with the favorite place to visit in Utah. Pretty sure there are many non LDS that visit.

I have to admit that I was not considering Temple Square as a historical site, but I guess that it is.

[Robert F. Smith]

I met a woman today who first encountered the Church at the Visitor's Center in Independence, Missouri, but she had been listening to The Spoken Word with Richard L. Evans for many years before that on the radio without knowing that it was LDS (she always listened to it before going to her local Baptist Church in southeast Missouri)..  She is elderly now and living in Utah, and she still laughs about discovering the Church all those years ago.

I recall one Sunday years ago getting stranded in St. George due to my rental truck breaking down there en route to Provo.  Since I couldn't get anything done on it till Monday, I wandered around downtown and found Brigham Young's nice winter residence.  An elderly couple of missionaries was on duty and showed me around.  I was fascinated.  Just as I finished my tour, a busload of non-Mormon young women from France showed up, and a real tour began.

Tour companies and tour-bus operators know that various Mormon sites are dependable crowd-pleasers, from the Polynesian Cultural Center in Hawaii to the Tabernacle on Temple Square (where the tour buses are lined up by the dozens every Sunday, filling nearly every seat in the Tabernacle for the Spoken Word).  Genealogists worldwide know of and use the many Church Family History facilities, or come to it online.  Aside from that many people use the various Mormon channels on the internet -- the per capita baptism rate for those seeking information on the Church that way is higher than for those contacted in the mission field.

We mustn't underestimate the importance of the hundreds of LDS sites worldwide.  That is where so many non-Mormons encounter us first.

[Buckeye]

Last week my family went on vacation in Philly and Boston. Amongst all the US history sites, we also stopped by the new Philly Temple (not yet open for visitors), drove by the Boston Temple, and on the way back to Ohio took the long way to visit the Smith birthplace in Sharon VT and the new Priesthood restoration site in Harmony PA. The couple who guided us in Sharon said they receive about 7,000 visitors per year. That's really sad. It was quite possible that we would be the only family that visited that day. If anyone gets the chance, I highly recommend taking the time to see it. It's a great visitor's center and actually the first historical landmark the church purchased when it began acquiring property in the early 20th century. That said, while there are only 7,000 formal visitors, the missionary couple said that each Christmas the church does a live nativity that attracts about 10,000 locals to visit. That seems to match my experience with the Kirtland visitors center near my home. Most all of the true visitors are LDS, but there is a large influx of non-members each Christmas when the church opens a display of 100s of international creches. 

As for the Priesthood Restoration Site, it's also a real gem, but like Sharon VT is out of the way and appears to get few visitors. Most all of the visitors are LDS. We were there on Sunday for sacrament meeting and about half the ward were couple or sister missionaries that ran the visitors center. I found it intriguing to think that the vast majority of missionaries (all of the youth missionaries) who work at the priesthood restoration site are members who are still excluded from priesthood office.

As another vignette, I remember visiting the Smith home in Nauvoo as a kid in the early 1990s. The CoC (then known as the RLDS church) owns the property. The tour guide asked how many in our group of appx 20 "were members of the church." All hands went up. Then she clarified: "I mean the RLDS church." All hands went down but 2. 

In the early 1990s the church ran a pageant in Nauvoo that was largely targeted to teaching the history of the town and basic gospel principles to non-members. Over time, it became apparent that most all of the visitors were members. The tone and theme of the pageant and therefore changed. Today is geared more towards teaching church members their history in the city, and in particular the history of the British saints that immigrated there. The production is much more professional than in my time. It's really quite good. 

[Thinking]

59 minutes ago, Buckeye said:

we also stopped by the new Philly Temple

I took this picture a few days ago.

 

[Buckeye]

9 minutes ago, Thinking said:

I took this picture a few days ago.

 

It's in a really great spot and is a lovely addition to the city. I'm also very excited for the local members who will have a new meeting space. The Sunday we were in Philly we met with the South Philadelphia Branch, who had been meeting for 2 decades in a rented space in a run-down building where you had to walk through a tax-return service to get to 2nd floor where the chapel was located. To go from that space into a gorgeous chapel on the temple grounds is quite an improvement.

[smac97]

12 hours ago, Thinking said:

As my wife and I travel, she makes it a point to visit LDS historical sites when we are close. Usually the guide will ask for a show of hands to indicate who is LDS or non-LDS. All of our visits have been 100% LDS. Surely there are non-LDS who have visited historical sites. Does anybody know the numbers or where to find them?

Thanks.

There are some, I am sure.  Temple Square is, as I understand it, usually the top tourist destination in Utah (and has previously ranked 16th in the country overall).  However, there are some things going for it:  

• Temple Square is located very close to an international airport and in a large city within walking distance of many hotels, which make it accessible as both a "destination" tourist spot and a "I've got a 6-hour layover in Salt Lake, so I may as well go exploring a bit" or "I'd like to take a look at Temple Square on my way to __________ ski resort / Park City / the Sundance Film Festival / _____________ National Park in Southern Utah"-style visitors. 
• It is literally world-famous and an integral part of a tourism-related visit to Salt Lake City (not unlike visitors to Rome going to the Vatican, visitors to Paris going to the Eiffel Tower or the Cathedral of Notre Dame or The Louvre, etc.).  
• It is the pinnacle of LDS-related tourist sites.

In contrast, many (most?) LDS historical sites (Palmyra, Kirtland, Independence, Nauvoo, etc.) are very much off the beaten path, and are therefore not going to be visited by "destination" tourists (and, for that matter, many "incidental" or "I'll stop there on my way to my real destination"-style tourists).  

Also, most of these sites have nowhere near the exposure/awareness going for them.  Idle or mild curiosity about Mormonism alone will not, in most cases, merit the time and money and effort for a tourist to go out of his/her way to visit, say, Nauvoo.

Frankly, I don't really blame tourists for not being particularly interested in most LDS historical sites.  Life is short.  Vacation time is shorter.  

Thanks,

-Smac

[Mystery Meat]

13 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I know the temple grounds in SLC Utah is right up there with the favorite place to visit in Utah. Pretty sure there are many non LDS that visit.

Since completion of the City Creek Mall Temple Square foot traffic has increased dramatically, which has resulted in more referrals, missionary visits, lessons, and even baptisms.

[Guest]

18 hours ago, Thinking said:

As my wife and I travel, she makes it a point to visit LDS historical sites when we are close. Usually the guide will ask for a show of hands to indicate who is LDS or non-LDS. All of our visits have been 100% LDS. Surely there are non-LDS who have visited historical sites. Does anybody know the numbers or where to find them?

Thanks.

Always have some non-LDS at Temple Square. Sadly some are their to disrupt.  

[ladyshanae]

5 hours ago, smac97 said:

In contrast, many (most?) LDS historical sites (Palmyra, Kirtland, Independence, Nauvoo, etc.) are very much off the beaten path, and are therefore not going to be visited by "destination" tourists (and, for that matter, many "incidental" or "I'll stop there on my way to my real destination"-style tourists).  

Also, most of these sites have nowhere near the exposure/awareness going for them.  Idle or mild curiosity about Mormonism alone will not, in most cases, merit the time and money and effort for a tourist to go out of his/her way to visit, say, Nauvoo.

At one point you basically had to drive through Kirtland - right past the temple - to get to Sea World and Geauga Lake (amusement park). I wonder if that increased tourism in Kirtland at the time. I was in my late teens and didn't pay much attention to the amount of people traipsing about on my way to/from work back then, but it does make me curious.

[3DOP]

21 hours ago, Thinking said:

As my wife and I travel, she makes it a point to visit LDS historical sites when we are close. Usually the guide will ask for a show of hands to indicate who is LDS or non-LDS. All of our visits have been 100% LDS. Surely there are non-LDS who have visited historical sites. Does anybody know the numbers or where to find them?

Thanks.

We were in Rome last month. It was sometimes discouraging to me to see all of the irreverent tourists, who clearly did not recognize how faithful Catholics might view their lack of appreciation for sacred places that are held in the deepest veneration by the faithful. To a Catholic, there is no comparison between the chains of St. Peter and the Grand Canyon. One is a cause for Catholic reverence. The other is a place of natural beauty, and I appreciate everyone liking it. But both bring out the selfie sticks. I really don't get why non-Catholics are wild about Rome. Anyway, whether it is positive or negative, I don't know, but there are a lot of non-Catholics who are crazy to visit things that if I weren't Catholic, I could not care less about.

[Thinking]

3 hours ago, 3DOP said:

We were in Rome last month. It was sometimes discouraging to me to see all of the irreverent tourists, who clearly did not recognize how faithful Catholics might view their lack of appreciation for sacred places that are held in the deepest veneration by the faithful. To a Catholic, there is no comparison between the chains of St. Peter and the Grand Canyon. One is a cause for Catholic reverence. The other is a place of natural beauty, and I appreciate everyone liking it. But both bring out the selfie sticks. I really don't get why non-Catholics are wild about Rome. Anyway, whether it is positive or negative, I don't know, but there are a lot of non-Catholics who are crazy to visit things that if I weren't Catholic, I could not care less about.

Some sites are both religious and historical. Even non-Catholics recognize the historical significance of the Catholic Church so Rome seems like a great place to visit. I would like to visit Vatican City someday.

[theplains]

Hard to tell. I don't think they request this type of information from the visitors.

Jim