Bugging Out vs. Hunkering Down

This article has been contributed by M.D. Creekmore of The Survivalist Blog.

The very idea of leaving the security of your home to “bug out” to the woods has never sat well with me – In nearly every instance it’s better to hunker down or “bug in” than to bug out. I mean, why leave the safety and familiar surroundings of your home, for the open and unforgiving wilderness.

For many people this is their first line of preparation against disaster, unfortunately, most will end up joining the multitude of other refugees freezing in a cave and eventually end up dead or wards of whatever government is still functioning.

I live in a fairly safe area and have prepared to survive at home and can conceive of only a few scenarios that would force me to leave. Even then, I would go to an out-of-state relatives house with whom, I have a pre-arranged agreement, where if need be he can come to my place or I to his after a disaster.

I know what you’re thinking “what about an end of the world as we know it” type event, well if such an event were to take place, there would be no 100% safe place for most of us, and really do you think you would be better of making a go of it in the open wilderness as opposed to hunkering down at home.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying we should never bug out to the wilderness; we should indeed keep all our options open, what I am saying is that there are better ways to survive most disasters than heading into the bush.

You need to weigh the risks of bugging out vs. hunkering down and make your final decision based on logic and type of threat. That’s the way decisions should be made, unfortunately many people when making plans for survival side with emotion (that emotion being to run and hide) instead of the more tried and true form of decision-making known as logic.

Relying on emotion instead of logic can make for some interesting adventures; however without sound planning beforehand those adventures are likely to be sort lived. For example, I recently asked a fellow in his late 30’s what he would do if disaster struck his area.

He thought for a moment and said he would gather his family and all the food, guns and ammunition he could find and head for the mountains that lay some seventy-five miles to the north of his home.

Depending on the type of disaster, his “plan” might work short term for a lone survivor or a small group of individuals in good physical condition with proper gear and mind-set. But he is a new father and his wife is one of those that think missing an appointment at the nail-salon is the end of the world as she knows it.

Making matters worse he has no outdoor survival training or skills other than watching reruns of Less Stroud’s “Survivorman” and camping at a national park campground with all the utilities and hookups. Why he thinks he can survive off the wilderness while dragging his family along, I don’t know. He isn’t thinking logically.

His decision was based on emotion and as a result if he ever has to put his plan to the test in the real world his family will likely suffer or die because of his decision and “Red Dawn” thinking. Unfortunately, this batman in the boondocks mentality is and will continue to be the chosen survival plan for many who haven’t thought it through.

When making survival plans for your family you have to honestly weigh the risks of your decision based on logic. In almost every disaster scenario, it is better to stay put (bugging in) or head to a pre-arranged safe place at an out-of-town relatives or friends house than it is to head to the woods to eat twigs and pine bark.

For most people an evacuation bag is a better choice than a bug out bag. An evacuation bag should contain the gear necessary to get you from point A to point B, whereas a bug out bag (in most cases) is geared more toward wilderness survival. I have both, but admittedly my bug out bag is an option of last resort.

Knowing when to go is much more important than the contents of your survival pack or even where you will go. You don’t want to jump and run before you need too, but you don’t want to wait too long or you may never reach your destination.

If you wait for the authorities to give the order to evacuate it may already be too late. The roads leading to safety could be blocked and impassable by motor vehicle and walking to your destination may be impossible or too dangerous to attempt.

On the other hand if you jump and run in response to every potential disaster you’ll soon deplete your resources and the patience of your family, school and employers.For example, say you live in an area prone to tornadoes like Texas and you evacuate to Arkansas every time the clouds turn dark or the wind shakes the leaves. You would literally stay on the road. But waiting until the twister is at your door will put you at an unnecessary risk.

There are no easy answers; all you can do is weigh the dangers of bugging out vs. hunkering down depending on the situation and logic. You have to consider the nature of the threat and ask yourself which gives the best chance of survival with regards to the type of disaster you are facing.

Then, there are times when evacuation is a no brainer, say you live on the Florida coast and a category 5 hurricane has been predicted to hit that coast within twenty-four hours, in that case you would be stupid not to go now, even if you have no prearranged bug out location…

On the other hand let’s say there is snow storm heading your way and you have food, water, heat and a way to cook even if the power goes out for an extended amount of time then you are probably better off to hunker down where you are.

In my opinion the bugging out vs. hunkering down debate is moot because it all comes down to the type of threat, your personal situation and preparedness level – in the end you’ll have to make that decision based on that knowledge and common sense.

“If I were to bite you, you’d go septic and it would be a fairly merciful and relatively quick, though painful death. :O)”

That’s one way to deal with it! LOL!

We dug hard for years, trying to find a way to manage my son if the SHTF. With our knowledge base, we could buy him 6-12 months and that’s the limit.

My mom would do a bit better and she’s already made preparations with a butcher shop to trade for her hormones, but (again) at best it would be a stop-gap.

For us older folk, we’re grateful for what modern medicine has given ups, but the kid...

What really sucks is that he was raised to be a real man. We bought 8 acres for him to tear up and I let him learn everything. He knows every weapon, how to fix just about anything, is the only human being that I personally know who can reliably start a fire with twigs and rocks, spends his spare time studying warfare tactics for fun. He really wanted to be a soldier and this disease killed that dream.

On top of it all, he’s just a nice guy.

Of all people, he’d be one of the most valuable assets if things got rough. And he’d be one of the first to go.

Still praying for a cure.

I’m praying that the “S” doesn’t hit “TF”. - I can testify to anyone that the soldier’s life is hard, even after the guns cease firing. My daddy was a soldier, combat veteran in WWII; was shell shocked even into his old age. Had flashbacks to a particularly bad battle in Italy even after he was in his late seventies. So scarred and such a strain on him and on us. - That being said; it was necessary, he was necessary in that struggle - to that task, to that burden. - I also hope and pray your son will be cured of the diabetes. For now, husband and I are fighting it tooth and nail so he won’t have to start drugs; so far, so good. The diet thing is a real challenge, the temptation to eat stuff he shouldn’t is always there and sometimes he falls.

The diet thing does work for Type 2. That runs rampant in our family as well and I was a ‘pre-diabetic’ a few years ago myself. My doctor put me on a ZERO carb diet for six months, then gradually brought me up to 45g a day for a couple of years. I lost 25 pounds rather quickly and my blood sugars dropped from an average of 185 to 100 on the nose.

My son’s disease is completely different. I wish they didn’t call even it ‘diabetes’ because it’s not the same thing. Type 1 primarily begins in childhood and it’s an autoimmune disease. Their bodies produce no insulin at all. Even without eating a single gram of carbs, their blood sugars will spike. It’s not caused by diet. (I know a friend of a friend who’s baby was diagnosed at six weeks old with type 1.) It’s caused by their own bodies attacking their Islet cells.

Type 2’s are *usually* (but not always) overweight and older at diagnosis. Type 1’s are usually diagnosed young and thinner. (My son was nine years old. My neighbor’s daughter was four and her son was eleven.)

You may already know all this, but I’m putting it out there because I’ve gotten some PM’s from people helpfully suggesting that my son can be ‘cured’ with a Type 2 diet, so I thought I’d add this info to the conversation.

Type 2 is treatable with diet because it’s caused by the body’s cells not responding to insulin - they have lots of insulin. Type 1’s don’t have any insulin to begin with.

And I agree with you, I pray that the S doesn’t hit the fan either!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.