...the 676 people who used Portsmouth Arms between 2009-10
As another poster said, there will have been additional passengers using tickets with no fixed start/destination - perhaps visitors exploring the area.
My view on this situation (in general) has always been that you cannot compare large, busy stations in towns and cities to many stations with far lower usage. It is completely preposterous to suggest that all railway journeys need to be made between large stations. Also, the beauty of the UK's system is that, even with station closures over the years, we have flexibility to travel point-to-point between all sorts of locations all over the country, some of which may be of benefit that is simply not statistically proven, but which allows people to have a better quality of life, enjoy rail travel and not worry about having to switch modes of transport. Just as people are given the choice between living in a small hamlet and living in larger settlements, so people should have the choice to use stations of smaller size. I am sure anyone in their right mind would agree that a station of lower usage on this line does not need a half-hourly service, but no service at all would be a chronic mistake.
Through the services of Dr Beeching and many others, we have lost enough stations which have served a valuable purpose in conveniently connecting communities with the rest of the country (and, through the wider network, much of North-West Europe, too). This is particularly ridiculous, considering pressures on roads and air travel.
Having said all this, I do accept that there are a small number of stations which are almost completely useless and do not serve any economic or social purpose. I can also see the need for more stations to be served only during specific event, or at certain times of the year.
P.S. I know you said you were playing Devil's Advocate. Here, I am replying as if you were 100% serious.