Last month, one of these weekly columns posed the question: “Should interstate exit numbers be changed?” I asked for responses with opinions to the question. Although I did not receive many responses, the ones that I did get were good ones. The majority favored mileage-based numbering, like most states do, rather than keeping exits numbered sequentially like currently exists throughout most of the state. Following are some of the responses I received.

Joseph from Saranac Lake writes: “I am not convinced this is an issue. I say leave the traditional exit sign numbers alone. My opinion is to stay with the New York state tradition and save the money. It’s not a problem.”

Robert (no location) says: “I agree it makes more sense for the exits to be numbered by the mile markers. That said, when they changed the exit numbers on the Ohio turnpike to mile markers, I never made the change. Now I need a GPS to find my home exit if the trees and barns have changed. Some of us old timers will never be satisfied.”

And, from Michael, (again no location), “I think they should be mileage-based, as in most other states. However, renumbering in New York has an interesting issue. The New York Thruway has two parts with separate Interstate numbers (and exit numbers). If it were renumbered, the two parts should be joined, so that if someone is driving on I-87 North from New York City, the numbers should continue on the Northway all the way to the Canadian border.”

Janet from Troy writes: “I strongly prefer sequential numbering for highway exits! I’ve driven both and find the other system needlessly confusing.”

Phillis, who reads the articles in the Malone Telegram, says: “I recently traveled from New York to Florida and back. I found that the all the states we traveled through used the mile markers for the exit numbers except New York. I found it was much easier to keep track of our progress on the interstate highways in the other states. The mile markers helped us to know how far we had traveled and how far we had yet to travel. It helped us to easily know how far away our next exit was. It also helped us to know how many miles to the next state.”

Kyle writes: “I live in Maryland and own a place in Tupper Lake. I make the drive 4-6 times a year and I find the numbering of exits in New York frustrating. In New York you need to know the exit number and the mileage to calculate how much further you need to go and which exit number to get off on. In every other state I drive in they are the same and makes knowing where you are in relation to where you’re going so much easier. If I see a green sign 47 miles to someplace and I’m at mile 150, I know the exit number is 197 (or 103, depending on direction). In New York you have no idea.”

And, from Don in Malone: “My initial reaction was that the country should be uniform with exit numbers so adopting the mileage method in New York state has some merit. I however am fiscally frugal and what little benefit derived from this change would be far outweighed in my opinion by costs and confusion.”

From Betsy, (no location): “I am strongly in favor of mile-based exit signs. It is so helpful to travel through other states that have this feature. One can easily determine the length of time it will take from one point to another. New York is behind the times.

Bob in Malone says: “I am in favor of consistency in marking. It also tells you how far away or close the exit is to your current location.”

David (not me) from Malone says: “It’s a federal highway system, thus the exit signage should be consistent in all 50 states. The feds came down on New York state regarding “violations” of informational signage promoting regional tourist-related activities and the state had to remove many of them along I-90 and the southern section of I-87.”

Jerry (no location) writes: “I am in favor of mile-based exit numbering as opposed to the current sequential numbering. I have made over 20 trips to Florida in the past 5 years. I find the mile-based numbering to be very useful for navigation. New York is the only state on my route that doesn’t use the mile-based system. Get with it New York!”

But the only response that really counts is one from state Department of Transportation. Their response is: “NYSDOT supports the use of the reference location sign numbering system for interchange exits and will be converting facilities on a corridor basis when the signs are at the end of their service lives, and funding is available. The Taconic (State Parkway), Hutch (Hutchinson River Parkway), I-99 (U.S. 15), I-781, and I-84 have already been completed.”

I thank everyone that sent me responses.