It sometimes seems difficult to get a feel for what the different off- road sites are like. Even when there are lots of photographs, they tend to be short on context.
And there seems to be a fascination with mud.
I spent a lifetime farming on heavy clay. I don't like mud. I don't think it's fun.
But what would I hope for in a description of a site? Well, start with some idea of the size, area and lengths of any routes. And, OK, you have to satisfy the mud-freaks, but don't forget the rest of us. What's the balance between routes you drive on the surface and routes where you have to drive in the surface? Similarly with wading. I realise depths vary with weather, but is the ground underneath firm?
On the day, if you have marked routes, how do you mark the alternatives? Do you have a map. Have you tested the wading depths needed, so you can at least warn of the difficult places? Any places that an LWB vehicle maybe ought to avoid?
I suppose that, in the end, I'm thinking of something not unlike the way that ski runs are graded. Although, what I've seen, there are often ways of providing less extreme options on a route. Maps and signposts again.
Anyone got any thoughts from the organisers side of the fence. I have a feeling that providing this sort of info might conjure up liability issues.