To Bug-In or To Bug-Out
March 23, 2011, Submitted by: Ken Tweet
During a serious threat situation or disaster, and while enacting your emergency / preparedness plan of action, you may decide to either ‘bug-in‘ or ‘bug-out‘.
Bug-In:
To ‘dig in’ and remain where you are (or at your normal place of residence)
Bug-Out:
To ‘get the heck out’ and leave your location (or your normal place of residence)
Most people don’t think about, or plan, for what they would do if presented with a serious threat situation or disaster. For many people in that group, a hasty decision will be made, and some will get it wrong.
We live in a world filled with risks, more than ever before, and many of them quite serious. Some of the more serious risks are entirely unseen and unknown to most because of a subconscious trust that exists… a trust in the current system the way it is, and complete faith that this system will continue to function the way we expect it to.
Having had modern conveniences and technologies for so long now, we have been raising generations of young and middle-aged people who mostly would not be able to adequately take care of themselves should some of the key conveniences and technologies disappear for a time. The fundamentals of survival are becoming lost with our grandparents.
This very fact alone has tremendously increased the level of risk – because should events unfold in a bad enough way, the result could be millions and millions of desperate people within a very short period of time. Desperate people do desperate things, and life as we know it could quickly become very dangerous indeed.
Getting back to the question, to ‘bug-in’ or to ‘bug-out’… It is ‘automatic’ for most people to head for home during a disaster. After all, home is our refuge, our stronghold, the place we come together with our family.
In many, if not most typical disaster scenarios, heading for home (bug-in) is probably the best first choice. Home is where your supplies are, a place where you may find support from your immediate neighbors or community. A familiar base of operations.
There are disaster scenarios though, where I believe that to ‘bug-in’ at home could be the absolute worst thing to do. Here is an example. You live in ‘the city’ and the city has lost power. If you are sure that the power loss will be temporary due to the circumstances that led up to it, then OK, you’re probably fine at home there. But, if the electricity remains out of service in a city region for too long, say, 3 days, then the city will very likely erupt into chaos. You will then be in a very dangerous predicament, even if you yourself had enough supplies to make it through. In this example, a ‘bug-out’ would probably have been the wiser choice.
A ‘bug-out’ does not necessarily require that you have a ready-stocked Retreat located 150 miles outside of the city tucked away in the countryside. Sure, if the disaster situation is serious enough, that is, very wide reaching geographically along with a very long time-line to recovery, then a temporary ‘bug-out’ to a hotel some miles away may not be the best solution. Maybe a friends house or other family member that lives in a safer location, assuming they will have you.
Discussing the many different disaster scenarios, ‘what-if’s’ and ‘what-to-do’, is not the point here. Instead we simply encourage you to put some thought around the subject. Start thinking about what you would do if this… or what would do if that…, you get the idea.
Think about where you live, the population density, the natural risks, the man-made risks, your current preparedness supplies at your residence, your plans ‘if’ you had to ‘bug-out’ or evacuate.
Stay ahead of the pack. Be prepared.
If you enjoyed this, or topics of preparedness or current events risk awareness, consider our survival blog RSS feed, new posts by E-mail, or bookmark us at Modern Survival Blog
Thanks Ken, as a family, we are getting together to talk about our plans, see if there is room for improvment in different areas, also to make sure everyone knows what we/they are doing and ensure each person is happy. we also have a ‘B’ plan, because there are so many situations going on around the world at the same time, it would not take much to ‘tip the scales’ and off we go!
I started telling my family about ‘being prepared’ over a year ago, in fact, I drove them nuts! but guess what? now things are happening, there is no panic, no running around like a headless chicken! everyone has fallen into their roles! of course there is some concern but its a ‘calm’ concern so, be encouraged, kept telling your loved ones, get them involved, make plans together, tell them about this site, it will help tons!. Ken, I have learned so much on here, found encouragement, advice and great ideas, thank you so much for all your time, keep up the good work, stay safe, stay prepared!:)
The most common disaster for most families can strike anyone, anywhere, at anytime. It’s not war, fire, flood, or earthquake. It leaves families with food insecurity, no shelter to live in and limited choices for hygiene and toiletry. This disaster is Financial Disaster.
When planning for other natural or man-made disaster families need to prepare for the day when they may lose their job and be unemployed for an extended length of time.
If you were unemployed for 6 months or longer would you be able to keep your house? Your car? Provide food for your family? Would you rather live in the city or out in the country? What would YOU do? Where would you go?
I have people that we are serving in our crisis assistance ministry that have been unemployed since 2008. Are you prepared? Do you know what to do?
Since I live in an apartment, space is at a premium. I barely have enough space to keep the stuff I use on a daily basis!
My strategy for folks in my situation is this: have a camping pack with 30 lb for men and 25 lb for women filled with supplies: hand crank radio, light, batteries, fire starter, pillow, sleeping bag, tent, gun and ammunition (NOTE: if you do not know how to shoot a gun, get a taser or stun gun!), hunter’s knife (stainless steel), flint, charcoal, a sturdy straw, water, and dried packed food. My wife and I planned to basically “grab and go” in the event of a disaster. Fleeing to friends and family is “easy” for us as I have a network of friends, family, and colleagues who would be willing to shelter us at least temporarily in each corner of the nation (by luck, I didn’t plan my friends on my survival needs LOL).
Eventually, I will want to build or buy a cabin in the woods somewhere, probably in a low population area, with people who live off the land. I’d have enough for a year stashed away. An alternative is an underground bunker (because in my view, it isn’t a matter of IF World War III will happen, but WHEN, and trust me on this, WHEN it happens, it WILL go nuclear).
You can pack this into a hiking backpack and
Firstly, fantastic site Ken
Thanks for your time and effort.
Has anyone experimented with power and heated water from the compost – like Jean Pain’s set up?
and if so what kind of success or failure did you have?
Ken, (or others)
I’m curious why you believe that a city would be more dangerous to stay in than traversing to the countryside in a total SHTF situation?
Most people claim cities/suburbs will be dangerous because of all of the desperate people there when they realize the power won’t come on and there is no food.
The reason I am skeptical, however, is the standard belief (that I’ve seen anyhow) of a mass migration out of the cities (the so called Golden Horde, to quote another well-known blogger) of these same desperate people into the countryside.
Seems to me that if the Golden Horde theory is true, the country side will be just as dangerous a place as the suburbs. More so, in my opinion, because you are also on the move and therefore have limited resources at your disposal.
In fact, one could argue that cities/suburbs will be safer, because all the bad folks will head out of town searching for food in the country, because they think that’s where the food is grown, so it must still be there, and then therefore the cities/suburbs will be deserted.
All of this is speculation of course, but I am curious to hear other peoples thoughts on the matter.
Kang
@Kang, It all makes for good discussion. There are quite a number of scenarios, and time-line possibilities, each with their own probable outcome, in my opinion.
If we’re talking about a worst-case-scenario (grid down for the foreseeable future), then, initially I believe that most city dwellers will stay, because we are all creatures of habit, and besides – if the grid is down everywhere, then most will say to themselves “whats the sense of going somewhere else where it is only going to be just as bad”.
Once the situation worsens substantially, lets say one or two weeks later, then I do suspect somewhat of a ‘Golden Horde’ exodus – but only after resources within the city are drained. I do not believe that the ‘majority’ will get too far, because fuel be will gone or in very short supply. I’ve surmised in a previous post that on average, people won’t get much beyond 150 miles based on avg. amount in one’s gas tank and avg. mpg. By the time it gets really bad however, no doubt there will be road blocks of thugs, and one wouldn’t get very far at all.
You could also argue that if there is to be any government assistance – bringing in food and water for example (how long did it take them for Katrina though??), the assistance would go to the major population centers first. On the other hand, if the situation that we’re hypothesizing is a worst-case-scenario, then I would suspect that most responders (police – national guard, etc…) will be more concerned about their own family survival.
In general, I believe in a worst-case-scenario, one would be much less likely to encounter violence or looting the further away from population-dense cities or regions. Most people that live in further outlying areas tend to be better prepared too, while not relying on all of the services that city folks are accustomed to. This would further reduce the likelihood of desperation by country folks, in my opinion.
Like I said, there are so many “what if’s”, that who’s to say what might actually take place. Interesting to think about though.
“In general, I believe in a worst-case-scenario, one would be much less likely to encounter violence or looting the further away from population-dense cities or regions.”
I agree with this quote, but with the caveat that the violence would really only decline greatly after you get approx. 1 gas tank’s worth of distance from a metropolitan area.
Thanks for your insight. The choice of bugging in or out is one that requires much thought for the majority of city dwellers / suburbanites (such as myself).
Kang
Thank you for your excellent blog, it is greatly appreciated. Bugging out is a great concern. I live in city surrounded by a lot of desert and would have to travel through a lot of barren area to find safety. All of my family members live in cities and we do not have anywhere to go at this time that would be considered rural. How can you easily travel with supplies that are so heavy such as canned goods? Would leaving your home and heading out to live in a tent somewhere leave you as vunerable as staying in the city with your supplies? It is a difficult situation, one that I believe many of us face.
It is so true what Ken wrote, even about a not so worst case scenario I could see just about any large city, 250,000 or more becoming a nightmare to live in or get away from. It seems like worst case scenarios are actually a lot worse than what was first thought to be a worst case scenario. Anyone that has doubts to how civilization will decay into something that resembles Mad Max 2 and 3 just has to look at human behavior. Society is a reflection on people and one just has to look at all the perversion and depravity, violence, and general unfairness and mean ruthless attitudes that people look for on television, the internet, and other sources. Good uplifting happy television shows and other movies have become scarce because most everyone doesn’t want them anymore and most people do not really want to feel this way anymore. There are exceptions of course, but society has gone down the toilet the past 15-20 years or so.
Anyone that wants to get a true idea of just how people will behave when society collapses for whatever reason I suggest you watch the Jericho TV shows, the movies; The Postman, The Lord of the Flies (1963 version is better), Escape from New York or LA, MAD Max 2 and 3. There are many others. This is how most people will react to true horror. This is why depending on the severity of the chaos the absolute best advice is to BUG OUT and do what Ken is saying and get as much distance between you and the masses as possible.
Those that stay behind in the larger inner city after the nightmare begins will likely be put into one of the following classes: slave, drafted soldier into some gang of thugs, victim of the rape gangs, starving to death somewhere, hiding like some frightened rabbit in some warren, sick and dying from disease, dead. It is true that metropolitan areas are places for advancement in careers and where the money is, and as long as nothing happens this is usually where the opportunity is. IF something does happen and you are in a major city then if I were you I would BUG OUT as quickly as possible and have plans beforehand to do so. If you have a car or truck store as much gasoline as you legally and safely can so you can get as far away as necessary.
I also tend to agree with Esker above about nuclear war. I have read something that is quite interesting about the odds of nuclear war. It is said that there is a 98% chance each year of no world war after World War 2. World war should occur as a 1 in 50 year period. This sounds good, but for each year after this the odds of peace goes down. 98% is factored by itself each. 98% times 98% for year 2 means there is a 96% chance of peace for 2 years after the last world war. It has been 66 years since World War 2, so 98% is factored 66 times to come up with 26% chance of peace for this year. There is a 3 in 4 chance of World War 3 beginning this year. Even If you use the 1 in 100 year world war event, 99% chance of peace after one year, 99% times itself 66 times is 52% chance of peace and no world war this year. A coin flip for World War 3 starting this year with this theory. This is statistics at work. Even at 1 in 200 years a world war happening is ONLY a 72% of no world war at this 66 year point since world war 2 ended. The “odds” only increase for World War 3 each year. People have not grown spiritually or intellectually to avoid fighting, if anything they have digressed. Another thought is that every type of weapon, at least known weapon, has been used in warfare, that is other than the hydrogen bomb. I feel that Esker is correct about World War 3 and only something dramatic is going to stop it, like a supervolcano or something else beating civilization before people can destroy themselves.
I do not know when you will have to bug out, but everyone should have a plan to get as much distance and obstacles (barriers) between themselves and the masses as possible. It should be considered that anything over 500 or so people in your bug out safe place should be reconsidered. The more people there are in your safe house the more chance there is of some individuals returning to the animalistic behavior that would ruin it for everyone. I am here talking about the total collapse of everything, discretion of course will be needed for lesser situations.
Dangerous breach suspected at nuclear plant is on the news right now. It is eerie how this Japanese calamity is following the same rhetorical gibberish we were told last year that everything is going to be all right with the oil nightmare in the gulf. I sure would not want to be in Japan right now. It should be noted with cells that normally run-away that turn cancerous usually start in the weakest part of the body. Anyone in any dangerous hot zones from this radiation or in the future should do what they can to build up defenses in their bodies that are weak spots to attempt to guard against cancer.
While I live on the outer edges of Phoenix, I still have a plan for Bugging In AND Bugging Out. I don’t necessarily believe one is safer than the other (city v. country); it all depends on the scenario. My plan is to Bugin until ‘they’ kick the doors down, I run out of ammo, or ???
After recently completing a 7-Day, 30 mile Bugout exercise with 50+lbs in my pack, I can tell you that 90+% of the public won’t make it very far on foot unless they are fit. Most will be in for a huge eye-opener…especially if your family has youngsters or elderly. I’m fit, and it was tough on me day to day; I highly recommend all preppers try this to understand what you’d be in for. So that needs to be taken into consideration as a part of your preps; get your cardio in order, and practice carrying and using your gear. What do you stand to lose?
Hopefully you won’t be relying on your vehicle to get you all of the way to your retreat location. In a true SHTF scenario, road blocks, fuel shortages, and ambushes will be real concerns to factor in. I firmly believe conducting your own dry-run of a Bugout ON FOOT will better help you re-evaluate your Bugout/Bugin plan. It’s one thing to fantasize about hiking through the hills to your location, and a totally different one to actually put the weight on your back and make it happen.
You simply have to ask yourself if Bugging Out will make your situation better or worse, and are you mentally + physically prepared, and gear-equipped for the trek.
As for the evil in man…one simply has to look at the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans. It’s disgusting to hear the personal stories that didn’t make the mainstream media news (rape, murder, violence, stealing other people’s water/ food). If you can’t defend yourself you’d better travel with someone who can, or else hunker down and stay out of sight.
SHTF scenarios can be very real, and more people should take time out of their lives to consider as many angles to it that are realistic.
Thanks for writing the article, and hosting this Blog. I continue to learn a lot from it.
Be safe everyone.
In a true SHTF that involves loss of the grid even for say 2-3 months, the death toll would be staggering. I wrote and article for another survival blog about the aftermath of the loss of electricity. The fact that Just In Time delivery of all inventory at EVERY store in the nation guarantees millions will die. The average grocery store has 3 days of inventory, max. The average home has 3-7 days supply of food. All reorders in national and regional grocery chains is all done by computers over phone lines. There isn’t even a mechanism in place to do manual ordering, it doesn’t exist!!! I live not too far from two large box grocery store distribution centers and one regional distribution center. I would just about bet the county commission and the sheriff’s dept will lock them down. All orders to food producers will not be made. Most of the food in the modern part of the world will ROT. So with the numbers quoted above most everyone in the city will be out of food in 10-14 days and water before that. Say a CME hit the earth and there isn’t 2% of the world’s lights on and those only on generators that need fuel, ordered by computers. If you live in the metro area post 2 weeks TSHTF and you do not have an impregnable concrete bunker or are well hidden in some odd magical place that won’t be found and you have food, guess what? Hope you don’t have any daughters and your wife is really ugly. You, you’re gonna be a slave or dead and your son will be somebody’s little puppy or a slave. If this came to pass it isn’t just wait till they get the lights back on. The lights wouldn’t be on for years in the cities and decades outside the cities. My conservative estimate is that 80-100 million people will die in the U.S. by the end of 60 days having starved or dehydrated to death or was murdered. The thing about it is that people will wait until it is too late to bug out cuz the gubment is gonna fix it. Until they come to the oh shite moment that they realize that the cavalry isn’t coming. When they do try to bug out it will probably be too late. They will be half starved to death, subject to now rampant disease and fetid rotting bodies and hordes of gangs in as bad shape as they are except they are going to kill them and take what little they might have. That’s also why I think that roving bands from the cities will be scarce outside of metro areas. By the end of 3-4 months I think 150 to 250 million people could be dead and that’s just here. Those that manage to feed themselves and survive and come out to the country to look for easy pickens will not live too long. If we wind up with 60-80 million left, which would be the population level of 1880-1910, we would have a lot of room to grow, a new point of view and perhaps we could get it right this time. Who knows? As an idealist and a romantic patriot I would like to think that the U.S.A. would survive. Unless there is some dynamic true leadership at the helm and lot of luck, I’m not sure how it will turn out. My grandaddy told me one time some gubment man came around Flora, Mississippi in the late 30s and asked how much better things were getting from the depression years and grandaddy said “what depression”? There will be areas even in our country like that, some continents, Africa, a lot of the South American interior, Siberia, rural China. India will suck as they are actually a modern country. Hopefully we will not repeat the early and mid 20th centuries in the coming decades. Enjoy.