I would like to see more emphasis on limiting the number of vehicles and camping units per site. Many NF campgrounds have limitations posted but virtually none of them are enforced. Particularly on summer weekends, it is difficult to even drive through some campgrounds because most sites are built for 2 vehicles. We often see as many as 6 vehicles per site, which means that many overflow into the interior roads and it can become almost impossible to pull a trailer through. Overcrowding like this is not conducive to a pleasant camping experience not to mention the stress that it puts on the facilities.
Obviously quite a few people like to camp with lots of companions, so there seems to be a need for some larger campsites. Some campgrounds have some double sites but they don't seem to be very common. Maybe NFS should give some thought to enlarging /combining a few sites in each CG to be used by larger parties and restricting the rest to 2 vehicles.

As long as people can put multiple vehicles in one space, they will not pay more to stay at a larger double site. In Oregon, at one CG all they had available were double sites ( all single sites were taken). I say make them all single sites & let people camp next to each other & enforce the max vehicle per space

Maximum number of vehicles should be enforced, but there also needs to be a couple areas in the campground where extra vehicles can be parked while people are visiting their friends.

We camp in the National Forest CGs because they lack many of the amenities and tend to attract a more quiet crowd.
I am all in favor of enforcing vehicle limitations. The more people on the site, the more noise they generate. They also tend to generate that noise long past the start of quiet time, 10 pm. People are like dogs, the more you put together , the louder they get.

We know there are exceptions, but . . . . .

The CGs we frequent rarely see a ranger after 4 pm so it is up to the campers to enforce the rules. A "county mountie" may drive thru' on Friday or Saturday night but that usually depends on the proximity of the CG to the county seat.
We spent 63 nights in the Chequamegon, Nicolet and Ottawa campgrounds this past summer with only a couple of less-than-ideal nights, people-wise.

One handy reason for having hosts is they normally have a way to contact the "authorities" when things get a little out of hand.

There are rules regarding the number of folks and vehicles at most campsites. Seems what is missing is enforcement. I agree that there does seem to be a lack of it. Or at least a lack of presence. In this age of doing more with less, moneys being taken from budgets, etc…How does one pay for this enforcement? Increase in fees? Increase in taxes? Will congress set aside more for the National Forest Service? I do not have the answer. I do agree that camp rules, well posted, are often ignored. I have often wondered why folks do not bat an eye to pay 75 to 100 dollars to go to see a professional ball game but would be up in arms if someone increased taxes the same amount to fund some worthwhile project.

IMHO, in general, taxes have been levied and increased to fund "worthwhile" projects. My problem is that we all have differing opinions of what is "worthwhile".