Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This thread is for dialogue purposes. I don't pretend to have the final say but hope to raise some good ideas/ opinions. A bug out location for this post's purposes is a place one moves to to fend for themselves/ live off the land BEFORE society "breaks down"…. and not just a place to exit to for the short term…
PS I don't believe in a selfish-head for the hills mentality- but rather a mentality of preparedness to preserve life and order in order to help people through AND AFTER societal calamity…
The worst first-
Number one worst- Los Angeles
-number one on the drought list
-dangerous
-no rain when irrigation fails
-no land to farm
-earthquakes, fires etc.
-tsunamis
-food shortages/ too many people/ riots
-could be nuked from the ocean
If things bugged out I wouldn't go to LA...
Number two worst-NYC
-8 million people on a 14 mile island?
- looting, riots etc
- no way to fend for myself.
Number three worst- San Fran /Bay area
- earthquakes
-dangerous
-will not be law-abiding in emergency situation(IMHO)
Number 4 worst- AZ, TX, NM
- no water
-Mexican border problems/ crime/ kidnapping
-difficult to fend for yourself/ live off the land in these places.
Number 5- Any place without water/ (and Florida)
Top Five Best Places?
Number one- Alaska If you can brave the temps and outdoors this would be my number one selection…probably very safe.
Number two- Remote Northeast- VT, NH, NY state(Maine has pollution issue(although others may too) from Ohio industry) These places may allow you to live off the land. Still cold but most warm weather spots won't have sufficient water. If there is a mass exodus from the cities(BOS/NY) then you may have trouble.
Number three- VA/West VA/ TN/ Kentucky
-Many places here farm already and are rural and remote. You will probably have water.
Number four-Northwest(WA/N.Idaho, OR)
-These places may be remote enough and give you enough water. You may be able to protect yourself as well.
Pollution in Maine? There's sites like any state with issues, but the semi-wilderness of Northern Maine is certainly not polluted. Southern NH is much worse than Maine or Vermont, due to sprawl...
Assuming this B.O.L. may become one's long term location - - -
The Appalachian chain has the advantage of being "old" and not too active, seismically speaking.
If near a hydropower dam, added plus.
If near to a railroad right of way, added plus.
If near to a navigable waterway, added plus.
My first arguement is with the "Worst" list: Arizona, NM, Texas. First, violence from the drug trade may not be an issue. It is only an issue right now because there is a market for it and there are laws (and law enforcement) against drug use. If society collapsed, there would possibily be less of a market for it (unable to pay for it) and no rules against. However, that doesn't mean that drug lords won't choose a different commodity to sell and/or keeping power through violence. (And currrently, most people along the border have little interaction with the violence or other bad aspects.) Secondly, the SW isn't bone dry. There is a lot of water in different areas, some of it quite remote. Plus, a person can easily collect enough rainwater during the monsoon season to live the rest of the year with. Plus, there are areas with plenty of groundwater and with modifications, can be used without the power grid.
My second argument is on the "Best" list: The NE has some remote areas, plenty of water, some good soil, etc., but it is also a day's drive (or less) from the huge population centers of the eastern seaboard. I see this as a very big drawback.
My favorite area is the northern midwest, but I'm a little biased on that. The U.P., northern Wisconsin, and northern Minnesota already have the cultural basis of being fiercely independent while embracing their unique communities. Add that many people think that it is too cold to grow anything, and you add up to less people wanting to go that way during a collapse.
Alaska, I live here, it's not a bug out location, we're not reachable from the lower 48 without transport through Canada or the sea. You're not bugging out here unless you already live here. You also can't really "get" Alaska unless you've been here for a year or more, so it's not exactly a great idea to move here on the spur of the moment without some form of backup plan, and since I assume you're bugging out this is your backup plan.
However on the plus side, outside of Los Anchorage and Fairbanks mostly everything is remote, and if the Zombies attack there are more than enough bears, wolves and coyotes to see them off in the summer, and they'll freeze in the winter. On the negative we're kind of territorial, so someone coming out to where we're at after some serious event may well be sent packing, unless they have something to offer for instance needed skills. But like I said the lower 48 isn't getting here unless they're traveling through Canada, or by sea.
I suspect the remoter areas of New England are very similar, I'm pretty sure Mac will be along soon to confirm or deny this.
Maybe it's a problem with the term "bug out location" to me that's something that's a temporary safe haven you know at most a few hours drive (or a few days hike) from your location, where you already know some of the locals (who won't be so likely shoot you on sight). It's somewhere that you've visited and cached some gear and supplies but you don't live there. You might be able to set up some kind of working Homestead there, but there isn't one there yet kind of thing. So by definition that has to be within some set radius of your residence most likely within 100 miles. So regardless of whether you want to bug out to Alaska, it's not happening if you live in Arkansas, unless you move here before you need to bug out.
One important point of note and it's something that I notice now I'm rural, why does everyone think that they'll just quit the city and go live in a rural area? Most rural areas are already occupied, and in some calamitous event the locals are going to defend what's theirs. If there's more than enough to go around then maybe they'll be happy for an extra body to do some heavy lifting, but if things are tight (and that's a relative term) then they may be more than happy to move that extra body along, or make fertilizer, if there's issues with them moving along. This is quite an important point because in a calamitous event unless you're known to someone in a community, then your chances of moving to the location protected by that community are very slim. This is something that you should bear in mind when preparing your "Doomstead" or your BOL.
Florida would be on my worst list. Having been here during a blackout in the summer it is simply unbearable without air conditioning a good part of the year. Just losing power for two hours had the temps inside the house at close to 90.
In addition the high criminal element and lowlifes in this state who are shady when things are under control, I can't imagine how they would act(actually I can) if the SHTF.
We have a very short growing season up here in Alaska, all goods must be shipped up and our winters are extremely tough, especially if the power grid is out. We do have a lot of moose, caribou & bear, though!
In New Mexico, there are already quite a number of back-to-the-earth communities that have been in place since the late '60s with a self-sufficient, barter foundation well-established.
Florida would be on my worst list. Having been here during a blackout in the summer it is simply unbearable without air conditioning a good part of the year. Just losing power for two hours had the temps inside the house at close to 90.
...
Florida, not a good place to be.
This also highlights the problem with contemporary housing. Houses built before central air conditioning won't be comfortable when there is no power.
A superinsulated structure, in general, has the potential to be a better shelter from temperature extremes. But it is not the complete answer to all climates and extremes.
So in choosing a B.O.L. , one might simply look for a place where one can build an autonomous shelter, designed to handle the local extremes.
My location is a good place in Amish country Ohio. What I can not grow is being grown all around me, and the Amish understand bartering {silver,gold,etc}. We are a just a short walk to a good size lake that is on the states top bass fishing list. The bad part is the winters are long,there has been snow on the ground here for 2 months.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
