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.
Wyoming would be your best chance - too many people back East. I'd say light out for a ranch in north-western Wyoming the moment you get the slightest whiff of something gone wrong. Hire on as anything. Whatever the work is, you'll catch on fast or be kicked out to try your luck at the ranch 40 miles down the road. Make yourself the best cook they've ever had. If they let you go up with the sheep in the spring, bring 'em back in the fall so fat and full of wool, they can barely walk. Make yourself indispensible and become a part of the extended ranch family. You'll be doing damn hard work and you won't be eating gourmet cuisine, but you WILL eat, and they'll be plenty of folks armed with 12 guages to keep the riff raff out.
What do you think is gonna happen when a few million people decide to bug out in the same area. You'll run out of food, water and pretty much be sol. The existing game will either be decimated or take off due to the amount of people coming in. Not to mention the fighting for any existing food, shelter, women and any comforts. I also doubt the locals will appreciate city folk coming in to take over their land. While its a nice fantasy to go bug out to escape live in the wild there is a lot of hurdles to jump over.
There are areas (admittedly very few) where nobody would go because there is absolutely nothing there to sustain life in our modern sense of the term. Without provisions, survival would be only a few days, if even that. Those are the sorts of places to look into. There would be no reason for "the hoards" to go there. And there are no "locals" to object. If you can provide for yourself a way to actually live in an area like this, you have a pretty good chance of continuing to do so under "darker" circumstances.
Would you make your way into the middle of a parched desert 50 miles from the nearest paved roads, where nobody has ever really lived, looking for water and food? Probably not. At least not if you are thinking clearly. And you'd never make it that far anyway without food or water.
Before we stray too far off topic, let me refresh it.
(Who) Common man/person: Anybody with wilderness survival training, experience, gear, and the ability to use it, but lacks the wherewithal to homestead or pack it in and abscond to a very remote location/community inaccessible by modern vehicles.
(What) The event: Economic failure, which triggers all forms of law and order to disappear. In reality, anything that causes all forms of government as we know it to fail, so there is no longer any rule of law, there are no utilities, and every system of our current society has just failed.
(When): This really doesn't need to be discussed as it's assumed to be in the future
(Where) Appalachians: This topic’s about the Appalachian Mountains that stretch from Georgia to Maine. I thought it would be interesting to discuss this region because in the lower 48 contiguous states, it’s the most remote area east of the Mississippi River. It also happens to lie within the most heavily populated areas of the United States.
(Why): Here again, it doesn't really have to be discussed. This is a "fantasy" as many have had to keep restating for the literal types.
Since I have some wilderness survival training, and I venture out into the Appalachians during the winter to stay for a few days while I trap fish and other small creatures, I thought this topic would be interesting to discuss amongst people with experience. I did start this topic, and I do love discussing bushcrafting/wilderness survival, but it is a public forum, and therefore subject to the whims of millions. While I'd like to see it stay on topic, it is your forum as well.
Enjoy,
bolillo
Last edited by bolillo_loco; 09-22-2013 at 11:43 AM..
Reason: No Rhodes scholar here.
While I agree with a lot of your post, I think one of the "fantasies" is that through modern living you avoid these things, even now. The only reason people can drive after snowstorms is someone plows the streets, who would be doing that after an "Economic Holocaust"? The only reason people don't get Giardia, Crypto, Tularemia, West Nile, Dysentary, Typhoid, etc. is we have health services and clean water, who provides these after an "Economic Holocaust"? As for competition, well right now you can go get your groceries at the local store, but after an "Economic Holocaust" who's going to run a store, and where are they getting their produce, how much competition is going to exist for your little 20' square patch of potatoes, carrots, tomatoes, and beans? If you read the initial parameters of the OP, economic meltdown, civil disorder, etc. These issues will all exist regardless of where or how you're living.
If there is an economic meltdown, then that means that the last job someone does is turn off power to the grid, and the stop valve at the water plant. So there's only water you have on hand or can collect, and no power unless you generate your own.
However that said, bugging out is not the best strategy, however it's a lot better than bugging in, and infinitely better than hope.
The best strategy is to be settled in an area, that you know, is productive, is remote enough, defensible, with clean water supplies, and has others in the area that have similar goals and experiences. That way you already know the weather patterns and have dealt with them, you know local pest life and what to avoid, and you've staked your hunting claims already, and the locals are more likely to back you up as needed (even as the town drunk), over some newcomer who lands and lays claim without any discussion, you're a known quantity, the newcomer is already on the back foot, because you know he's going to be parked in someone else's claim area..
Yes competition is going to exist if you bug out, both from people who already live in that area or even areas you're transitioning through. I often mention the rural wall, that urbanites/suburbanites are likely to hit in these situations, where rural dwellers blockade routes into and through their areas to prevent an urbanite invasion. Then there is competition from those who may be new transplants to that destination area.
If your strategy is that you survive a few weeks before someone comes through and gives you some help, given the OP Parameters then you're strategy is flawed. Aid if there is any, and it can be distributed will be supplied on a utilitarian basis. Which means big cities first, and the biggest cities too, with good transportation networks, and likely close Military support. If you're not located in one of those places then it could take months or more before any kind of aid gets to you, and if you move to one of those places, you run the risk of moving through someone elses territory, and robbers watching transportation routes.
Then local problems if you get to that aid, more people means lower rations per person distributed. Plus where do you live, where do you get water from, lots of people without any real waste management and processing means your risk of disease is much higher.
The criminal element also preys on these areas (both the aiders and those receiving the aid), with racketeering, human trafficking (it wouldn't be exactly difficult to transport an unwilling stereotypical American Cheerleader to the Middle East or Eastern Europe given that situation), prostitution, gambling, booze, drugs all based on an economy fueled on valuables people bring (weapons, ammunition, booze, drugs (both therapeutic and recreational), clothing, jewelry, gold, electronics, batteries etc.), services they're prepared to offer (violence, sex, skills and knowledge) and food.
You only need to look at Eastern Europe at and after the fall of communism, or the Balkans to realize that the type of collapse spoken about would take years if not decades to correct, and that what exits from the other side of that collapse, would not be the same US of A as went into it. You can also see the various "mafia's" that sprang up from those times in those countries to know that crime in those places is incredibly lucrative, the goods you supply are relatively cheap. It's food often stolen, or antibiotics also often stolen, with sidelines in racketeering which is pure profit, prostitution which is also pure profit, booze and drugs, and the prices you charge can be exorbitant. Kids got a fever, a $1.50 course of penicillin will cost you that 0.5 carat diamond engagement ring, or you can wait in the clinic line now and you might be seen in a couple of days, you can't leave and lose your place, your kid can't die either, and then if they have the drugs he might get treated.
I have always been curious about one point. Jefferson, Adams and many of that time period lived until their 80's and 90's. They had no waste management or clean water systems.
I've asked this question of a few before and they say well, there was no pollution and the water was clean. After reading up on that time period it seems many rivers were polluted along with lakes. Solid waste dumped right in and garbage. Rats and mice certainly were a problem then as well.
In the old west, people didn't drink filtered water. Of course many people died from diseases but many did not. Those that survived I would assume had better immune systems.
I guess now it would be sort of like Americans going to Mexico and drinking the water. We would get sick but they don't.
I guess what really comes to my mind is with all the advances we have made it is interesting that many of us still die before our 80s and 90s with so many cancers and diseases. Some make it longer as they did then. But our immune systems are probably weaker living in such a sterilized world.
With the chemical pollutions out there now, I wonder how many would survive if noway to filter in a complete shutdown. Could the immune system bounce back in a generation of total meltdown?
Just some uneducated thoughts as I was reading this.
I am in the process of a move to a remodeled farmhouse in a rural region just south of my town. I'll have the option of using a wood stove to stay warm (tons of firewood just for the taking around here), water from both a well and irrigaton rights, a chicken yard that can be easily repaired and filled with chickens and other useful farm birds, a large garden area, fruit trees and hay fields (feed for cows, horses etc). I think me and my 12 guage would make our stand right there. The heck with the Appalachians!
I am in the process of a move to a remodeled farmhouse in a rural region just south of my town. I'll have the option of using a wood stove to stay warm (tons of firewood just for the taking around here), water from both a well and irrigaton rights, a chicken yard that can be easily repaired and filled with chickens and other useful farm birds, a large garden area, fruit trees and hay fields (feed for cows, horses etc). I think me and my 12 guage would make our stand right there. The heck with the Appalachians!
Location is the most important consideration and you've chosen one far from the city hordes. It's unlikely that you'll ever need to fire a shot at another person. A problem that doesn't exist beats solving a problem.
So many people rattle on and on about the perfect location but they live in the big city or its suburbs.
I have always been curious about one point. Jefferson, Adams and many of that time period lived until their 80's and 90's. They had no waste management or clean water systems.
I've asked this question of a few before and they say well, there was no pollution and the water was clean. After reading up on that time period it seems many rivers were polluted along with lakes. Solid waste dumped right in and garbage. Rats and mice certainly were a problem then as well.
In the old west, people didn't drink filtered water. Of course many people died from diseases but many did not. Those that survived I would assume had better immune systems.
I guess now it would be sort of like Americans going to Mexico and drinking the water. We would get sick but they don't.
I guess what really comes to my mind is with all the advances we have made it is interesting that many of us still die before our 80s and 90s with so many cancers and diseases. Some make it longer as they did then. But our immune systems are probably weaker living in such a sterilized world.
With the chemical pollutions out there now, I wonder how many would survive if noway to filter in a complete shutdown. Could the immune system bounce back in a generation of total meltdown?
Just some uneducated thoughts as I was reading this.
They had well water and learned how to make filters. When people landed in America and began homesteading, some were on the verge of dehydration because in the 1600s they didn't know that boiling water killed waterborne illnesses that brought on death. Furthermore, since they were European settlers, they dared not drink from bodies of water because back in Europe all natural fresh water was polluted. They dug shallow wells, and that's where they got their water from. I'd imagine that sometimes the water wasn't potable and it caused illness or death. The earth filters out a lot of things that will harm you. I live in one of the oldest parts of the country. The neighbor's home is actually a log cabin under the facade. The home shows up on maps from the early 1700s. I don't know how old their well was, but the last well that was replaced was only 30 feet deep. Another home a mile away that's just as old, and it still has an old well on it that's only 15' deep.
Drinking potable water and eating edible food in other locations and getting sick isn't the same as Giardia, Crypto, Dysentary, or Typhoid. We're confusing a mild illness from different germs making one sick and a viral, parasitic, or bacterial infections. I am not a doctor, so I can't really explain the differences. Getting sick from edible and potable water is a minor discomfort and the ingestion of the other will kill you if you're not treated. It's my understanding that you can catch it through any opening in your body such as eyes, ears, etc.
I guess what you're asking is sort of like malaria. There are people who are naturally resistant to it, but waterborne illness claims nearly everybody it attacks if left untreated. When reading about WWII prisoners of war being held captive by the Japanese, the death rates from contaminated food, water, and starvation were very high. I've never been into reading fiction, so I've read about a lot of war. War fascinates me. Not the bang bang you're dead bad guy stuff, but the personal stories of hardship, mind numbing boredom sporadically interrupted by stark sheer terror. I like reading about what caused them, who profited, and what people did to survive. I like reading about the unknown services, psychological warfare, etc. Hence, in my nearly 50 years, I've devoured a lot of non fiction war stories, and water and insect borne illness claimed the lion's share of casualties during WWII in the Pacific, China, Burma, and India theaters of operation. I participated in active debates about WWII, and to this day, people still think that X plane is better than Y plane and how it won the war, yet most airmen losses were due to non combat related issues. The bugs, water illnesses, sharks, crocodiles, and snakes were far more dangerous than the enemy regardless of which side you were on.
This is why I started this topic. I happen to think that prepping is pointless. Oh sure if you'd like to have a week or two of water, food, and petrol to run a generator because the weather knocked out services, fine! I find that sort of preparation laudable. You're doing your bit because you've the wherewithal and health to prevent becoming a victim or living in an area that's disaster prone that's always in need of government assistance.
However, from all that I've read in various forums, friends, and people I've talked to in person, the majority of preppers are getting ready for a Los Angeles type riot circa 1992 that our entire nation and most of the world fall into. Should the entire United States fall into chaos, dangers from contaminated food, water, and desperate mobs/people turning to violence will be paramount. Moreover, there's really no place safe in the northern hemisphere due to all the nuclear reactors. I happen to think that everybody's fears are justifiable and I suspect myself that something could happen, but all this frenzied guns, bullets, and "preps" that people are panic buying is just the powers that be selling fear once again. Fear is the best motivator known to man. It far outsells sex, which is also quite popular.
People often point to the Balklands, USSR and it's satellites after the 1991 collapse. Post WWI Germany, Argentina late 90s/00s, and The Great Depression are often brought up, and people point out how things "normalized or order was restored after a year to a decade." That's all well and good, but those historical times, countries and economies didn't have 310,000,000 modern people in them incapable of farming their own land. There are few similarities to historical economic collapses than their are similarities. We are a different country and people today and share nothing in common with others that already went through it. Moreover, we're a nation full of black, white, Hispanic, Asian, and other mixes that don't mix together very well. Furthermore, in other places where the economy collapsed, more fortunate nations and the U/N stepped in to provide aid.
The petrodollar is the only thing that holds the American economy up. If any other countries threaten to trade off the American petrodollar, the full weight of the United States Government falls upon them and they're slapped full of embargoes and sanctions. If an oil producing country sells oil and accepts anything other than the petrodollar, the full weight of the United States Government invades them. Hence, if our current economy fails, all other nations who are anybody will fall with us, so no help will be coming to our rescue. If one believes we've had ridiculous inflation over the past ten years, one should look at how America's poor economic polices affect other nations. As I understand it, the entire world's paying for what our wealthy elite are doing because everybody is is anybody has to buy oil with petro dollars. Hence, if we fail, it will indeed be murder, mayhem, and complete chaos. It seems as though most people just cannot look beyond today and imagine a world without present day government.
This is a hypothetical topic for debate. The only reason one has to know why the economy failed is because I was the topic starter and I said it did. I've actually read each and every response to this thread. Common people who do not know how to hunt, fish, and how to prepare meals from scratch will not survive, so I don't see the woods being full of 310,000,000 people. Most people cannot start a fire using primitive methods. Even when armed with a ferrocicerium rod, most common people can't start a fire out in the bush on a nice warm clear day, so if it's raining, has rained, or is very damp, it's an impossible task. From 1850 - 1900, 30,000,000+ people that made up the United States hunted most game and dangerous predators into extinction. I feel most of the population will look for easier methods at procuring shelter, water, and food. They will look to abandoned homes, warehouses, and other man made facilities.
After reading each post throughout this thread, I can tell you one thing for certain. As far as my being able to survive, I know I could. As long as the element of luck stayed with me and somebody didn't shoot me for my kit, I can make it. I am psychologically able to handle it and I've some practical experience. When my factory closed, I lost 80% of my income and I had to move into an all black neighborhood because that's all I could afford. I used my survival instincts and adapted. As a white man, I found that Hispanics went well overboard if I spoke Spanish, so I learned the conversational Spanish in about three months.
As I got poorer, I went homeless, lived in all sorts of crazy situations, but I did survive. I lost most of my friends when I went poor. Living in the woods alone or being unable to adapt to one's new lifestyle will get many but not all people. Dealing with mind numbing solitude on top of all this is pretty harsh. I actually spend time in the woods sleeping in primitive shelters I've knocked up while eating the occasional fish, bird, and furry critter I've trapped. I can make friction fire, but I wouldn't want to bet my life on it. However, with a ferro rod, I can make a fire 100% of the time regardless of whether it's just rained for a week or is currently raining. I can go out in the woods for a week and be happy living like this in the dead of winter all by myself. I do this because I enjoy bushcraft. I am not prepping for the collapse of The United States. This thread isn't intended to be about me being able to do it and whether or not you think I can make it. It may seem that way, but it's not. I am simply stating that I know some basics and recognize the fact that I am not unique, so there are obviously others who will know what to do in order to affect their personal survival. I've pointed out several times what the parameters of this thread are about, but feel free to discuss whatever your heart desires.
Violent factions of former military, police, and organized crime will step in and be tyrants. I know this to be true because human history is full of failed economies and empires. All one has to do is read some history.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy in Wyoming
Location is the most important consideration and you've chosen one far from the city hordes. It's unlikely that you'll ever need to fire a shot at another person. A problem that doesn't exist beats solving a problem.
So many people rattle on and on about the perfect location but they live in the big city or its suburbs.
I couldn't agree more, but keep one thing in mind, in 1492 they managed to sail from Europe to North America. Look at how many different factions invaded England. From Romans in 55 B.C. through the French in the 1700s all put some warring contingent on the UK. Out west does look attractive, but there's limited water, the good land's already claimed, and it takes a lot of wherewithal to execute such a move. If anything does happen, sooner or later, people will be ferreted out. Even Timbuktu, which was legendary for being remote and isolated, was invaded. Just looking at the numbers of times England was invaded is staggering. Whether it's for sex trade or some faction's just looking to expand its territory, I'm quite sure there's still a good chance that remote communities will be hit at some point, but I do agree that it is far more attractive than having New York City 100 miles from one's door.
Thank you for reading,
bolillo
Last edited by bolillo_loco; 09-27-2013 at 05:54 PM..
Reason: No Rhodes scholar here.
Many talk of the Depression here is a picture of my Grandfather, Uncle and couple friends during the Depression, took their Gas Rations together to make this trip in Colorado.
brushrunner
There wasn't gas rationing during the Great Depression. Gas rationing was implemented during WW II, which would been 1942 at the earliest.
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.
Actual Topic
