«-- Letter Re: Holster, Sling, and Web Gear Recommendations | Main | Note from JWR: --»
Two Letters Re: The Shenandoah Valley as a Retreat Locale?
Dear SurvivalBlog Readers:
I currently live in Virginia and what Jim said about retreat locale selection
is generally accurate. That's not to say "all is lost!".
Hardly, there are some advantages you have in our area that I've only found
in a couple
other places in the US, and you can successfully find a retreat location.
You just have to work harder at it. The simple fact that most people live where
they do is because it's easier. The more remote locations, and the more secure,
tend to be more work to live in. It's all balance and trade off.
Due to the improvements to US17 and the construction of I-66, the area you're
in now will be expanding out to the west very soon. Mike knows better than anyone
the amount of growth the state has experienced, and Manassas used to be in
the sticks just a few years ago. Culpepper/Warrenton/et cetera. were down-right
the boondocks, and they will be the next housing area for the Capitol
in a decade or so. All of us see the expansion before our eyes.
The biggest problem with the Shenandoah is it's a natural corridor. I-81 and
the AT just make it a massive avenue of approach. But within the mountains
you can find a place that is indeed suitable. It's just going to take more
work. I can't think of too many places as beautiful as that area, and even
the I66 corridor is pretty, and simply put you just have to really look hard
to find the right place. The farther West you go, and even into West Virginia,
the terrain is more favorable, but in the end you just have to make an intelligent
decision on the place that's right for you. You can name any area in the country,
and with few exceptions you can probably find a decent place for a retreat,
and a lot of places to avoid. That goes for West of the Mississippi as much
as the East. It's just you have to look harder in the East.
Narrow down your areas to less than just a general region. Do an "IPB".
That's "Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield". Figure out
the most likely risks and make a list in priority. It's your priority because
it's your list. Take counsel, but it's still your survival, and you're the
one who really has the responsibility for deciding what's important and what
isn't. Then take a map and make overlays, or just mark the map of areas that
are "no-go", like the obvious ones that you can block off as not
where you're going. Things like Quantico, DC, etc. aren't probably going to
be high on the list of areas for a retreat. Plot the avenues of approach on
the map (the refugee flow) and you'll start seeing where to look and where
not to look quickly. Once you narrow down the areas, look at resources and
plot those. Basically, just take the area and graphically make the process
of elimination. What's left is where you should start looking.
You can also take a more "think outside of the box" approach to things.
Generally speaking it's simpler to have a "one-size-fits-all" retreat.
We'd all love to live at our own ranch and somehow pay bills and live off the
grid, yada,
yada. Sure. For many of us it's simply not going to happen. We choose, rightly
or wrongly to live where we are for a variety of reasons. The choice is ours,
as the responsibility is ours and ours alone (not the government's or anyone
else's). So if you're stuck in a bad place to begin with, make the most of
it.
Take the list of most likely threats and see if there's a way to divide them
up. For example Tsunamis, hurricanes, floods, etc. can pretty much be obviated
by a retreat in a relatively close position to where you live. It doesn't take
much but being inland, with high ground, and a stockpile of supplies to deal
with it. Having a "risk specific" retreat complicates things in that
you don't have the simplicity of a single place, but you may not really need
the place for World War "Z". You are much more likely to need the place that
can deal with floods, civil riots in the Capitol, hurricanes, etc. You can
easily find a place like that where you desire. Do the same IPB, just base
it on a narrower list of risk and you should have a wider area to choose from.
Obviously there are big disadvantages in this. More than one retreat location
greatly complicates things. It increases expense, It greatly increases risk
because you just might be wrong too in your planning. But sometimes your bomb
shelter just can't be proof against a direct hit. There's a risk trade-off
in everything.
In my years in Virginia, I've run into several situations were we were either
on our own, or it had the potential. Most were Hurricanes, some blizzards,
a localized
riot or two, a terrorist attack, and the everyday crime/fire/etc that is frankly
the most likely and just as destructive to your everyday life. (You do have
a fire extinguisher in the kitchen, right?). Odds are pretty high these same
things are what I'll face in the future, rather than the ultimate collapse
of civilization. So there is a lot to be said about starting small and improving
things. A closer retreat can deal with a lot of things you're likely to face.
It can also allow you a base to rebuild your residence from if you're house
burns down, etc. that's easier to operate out of than one far away. Obviously
it would only be a valid locale for a limited amount of scenarios, but the
most likely ones.
So think about approaching it in stages. Getting a "good enough retreat" now
and a "perfect retreat" later might be a viable way to go. It's far
more risky than going all out and doing the "perfect retreat" from
the get-go, but the actual risk can only be judged by you for your own situation.
You're the only one responsible for yourself...as it should be. Regards, -
Doug Carlton
James
I enjoyed your repost of the "Illusion of Isolation" article in reply
to Mike's query about the Shenandoah Valley being a good retreat location.
My
own observation is that the Shenandoah is far too crowded and accessible to
the fleeing hordes, many of whom are already there as the northern end of the
Valley is already a bedroom community for the "Peoples' Republic of Stalingrad",
DC. He really needs to get out farther than is a practical commuting distance
from the city. As you note, the East is a challenge because getting a full-tank
distance from the city is simply not possible for the most part.
I would recommend that Mike look a little further south and west; south of
Harrisonburg or quite a ways west of the interstate. Once you get ten miles
back from the interstate it is an entirely different world, and if you get
25 miles west of Staunton and cross over Shenandoah Mountain you will be infinitely
better off as you find yourself amongst very self-sufficient folks for the
most part. There also are some isolated areas near Winchester at the northern
end of the valley, but it has long been an area for weekend/ski getaways for
city folk. Recently there was a northern Valley realtor whose sales pitch touted
the fact that Winchester, Virginia was outside the "blast zone" for
DC. All the Best, - Crusher
