It has been a bad year, but not as bad as expected. That's the consensus among tourism experts who have been monitoring the performance of the industry since the foot-and-mouth crisis broke last February.
While the worst fears of hotel closures, widespread job losses and a collapse in foreign exchange earnings have not been borne out, that doesn't mean business has not suffered.
Indeed, the industry has become tetchy of late regarding claims that the trade is somehow back to normal. As reports emerge of accommodation shortages, particularly in major towns and cities, it stands accused of exaggerating the extent of the crisis, if that is what it should be called.
Central Statistics Office figures for the first quarter of the year show visitor numbers were down by only 2.4 per cent, a drop attributed to a collapse only in the British market. The number of North American and European visitors actually rose.
Aer Rianta figures for the first six months of the year showed passenger numbers had increased by 3 per cent. At Dublin Airport, European traffic was up by 14 per cent, trans-Atlantic traffic by 7 per cent.
So has it been a case of the industry crying wolf?
Absolutely not, says Mr Tony Kelly, chairman of the Irish Tourist Industry Confederation. "I'd be very hesitant to say everything is OK just because we have a busy July/August. We need to do well in the peak summer months to make up for the losses. People have bills to pay, and have obligations to the banks, and it'd be a long hard winter for them if they didn't do well at this moment."
Foot-and-mouth has affected different sectors in different ways, he says, "from not so bad to pretty disastrous".
Ferry companies, for instance, have been worse hit than airlines. Surface transport was down by between 25 and 30 per cent between March and May, and even this month it has been running 10 per cent behind 2000 levels, says Mr Kelly.
"This has had a significant knock-on effect on the rest of the industry because people who travel here by car tend to stay longer and be higher-yield."
Like other industry figures, he says this year's performance should be seen in the context of a projected annual growth in tourism revenue of 5 per cent under the National Development Plan.
"However you look at it," a Bord Failte spokesman, Mr John Browne, says, "we are facing a situation where not only will we not achieve our growth targets but we will see a decline for the first time in 14 years."
Mr Browne concedes that the losses in overseas earnings will not be as great as the £500 million initially predicted by Bord Failte. However, he says, "it would be wrong to suggest anything other than that it was a really bad year.
"What really saved us was domestic tourism, which seems to have been quite strong. This was due partly to the reassurance campaigns and partly to the very good offers from traders."
Other industry figures talk of a rural-urban divide, citing bigger losses in remote areas.
Mr John Power, chief executive of the Irish Hotels Federation, says his sector was particularly badly hit due to the extra factor of a downturn in the information technology industry.
"IT companies would be big users of hotels for training and conferences. We've taken a hit there along with all of the cancellations of functions and events at the height of the foot-and-mouth crisis," he says.
He believes Bord Failte's projections are over-optimistic and that revenues for the year will be down by at least 10-15 per cent on 2000.
He still stands over a warning he made at the height of the crisis that up to 20,000 jobs would have been lost if restrictions on movement had remained in place. "Were the nightmare scenario to occur and were we to have another outbreak of the disease I don't see the same blanket restrictions occurring again.
"The truth is tourism suffered most," he says. "Agriculture was inconvenienced. There was enormous worry and distress for farmers, but they were compensated. The tourism sector had to take it on the chin."