It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Size of Survival property

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 02:11 PM
link   
I think that the size or amount of land you own is a moot point altogether. Land rights are not going to mean a thing when the SHTF. And as far as an area being "Defensible"... well, 1 person, or even 2, cannot adequately defend an encampment of any size.

I honestly believe that survival is going to become dependent upon people's ability to cooperate with one another. It will become essential for like-minded people to band together and share in defense, gathering, hunting, farming, etc... Whereas I do believe that 1 person could survive on their own - it would probably require that they be constantly on the move or that they secure a location that is so entirely remote or difficult to get to that other's looking to survive simply wouldn't risk getting to it. Think a cave on a cliff or in the middle of a swamp.

Beyond that I honestly believe that those who adopt a tribal attitude and build a defensible encampment will stand the best chance of making it through a calamity.




posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by kozmo
 


I agree with you on the property rights issue as well as cooperation with others being the key to survival. However, I'm not totally convinced of the necessity for a tribal type living arrangement. Several neighbors working together is a good thing, but a person needs to be very selective about who they choose to allow into their survival community. I guess you could say neighbors working together might constitute a tribe, but I'm more inclined to believe the smaller the better.

Not everyone is honest, nor will they necessarily work for the good of the group if allowed to join. They may outwardly appear to do so, but the moment things fail to go there way they'll probably leave, and then become a liability. They will know your living arrangements, your security measures and precautions, your group size and strength, weapon types and numbers, etc. and can freely share this information with looters and other undesirables.

[edit on 18-1-2008 by LLoyd45]



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by LLoyd45
 


Oh, I agree with you entirely. It would be beyond foolish to simply allow any passers-by to become a part of your group. Oh no, no, no... I meant, and assumed all would understand, that the make-up of this "tribe" would consist of family, friends and neighbors - people you know and trust.

Eventually, along the way, others would likely discover you and lobby to become a part of the group. At that point, group-think would need to prevail and all members of the group would need to decide collectively if that would occur. I don't want to derail the discussion into the nuts and bolts of admitting people into your group etc... This thread is for discussing the land requirements for survival.

To get back to that topic I would say that the size of the land area is probably not as critical as location. Assuming that you have "Communized" with like-minded, trustworthy indiviuals, you would need an adequate supply of fresh water to support the group. A defensible location, probably on high ground, arable land to grow on and access to land for hunting, fishing and gethering.

Weather also becomes a major consideration. Weather will dictate the need for building materials or availability of natural shelter locations. The more inclined the area is to inclement weather, the more time and resources will be necessary to be comitted to your survival effort - also, the more visible your encampment becomes at greater distance!



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 07:59 PM
link   
It appears as if most discussions such as this typically turn to TEOTWAWKI (which is probably a good place to plan for, because then you can be covered for the most part). But what happens if it is a less sever but still potent level 1 or 2 (according to the thread"Categories and Classes of Situation X")? Most laws will still be enforced so for the most part, you won't be able to just take what you want and use it, but basic services could be disrupted beyond immediate restoration and you might either be on your own as far as power generation, water, food, or basic necessities or some or all of the above. Either on your own, or off to the nearest FEMA or UN shelter.

At this point, to me, it would be a good idea to actually own, on paper, a decently prepped and stocked piece of property whether a small lot in a city, 5 acres on the edge of a small town, or 1000 acres of pristine wildlife, rivers, lakes and fields.

Then if it is a level 3 through 5, property laws might not matter that much or at all, but at least you will have a leg up by already occupying the property, having the property prepped and knowing like it is your own...because it is.



posted on Jan, 20 2008 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by tlshark
Again, I realize in a total tshtf scenario property rights might be questionable, I could still be theoretically the first person there and able to secure it.


When my family shows up at our land, there will be no question as to who has the rights to the property.




posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 12:15 AM
link   
reply to post by reblazed
 



Who are you having build the underground house? My husband has his mind set on building one once we purchase the property. He thinks we can do it ourselves, but I don't think so. Thank you and good luck to you too!



posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 09:43 AM
link   
Some have mentioned that property rights will not matter post-TSHTF. That is true up to a point, but the advantage is still with the land-owner as they will have more of a tenacious will and right to defend it as it is 'theirs', plus they should know it like the back of their hand. Some roaming gangs would consider it a target not worth getting killed over and move on to a softer target. Also, there will come a time when Law is once again implemented.

As to size, you should think in concentric circles with your home/retreat in the centre. This should be a smallish area that has height advantage and the maximum protection. Then, go outwards from there in increasing circles to the perimeter of your land. Small holdings will be the best protected with large 1000 acre holdings being virtually impossible to totally protect unless you have a battalion sized community.



posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 11:57 PM
link   
reply to post by LLoyd45
 

I think a lot like you lloyd, our family just bought 5 acre out from Provo Utah. We are fencing and cross fencing for the animals. Our water is 300 ft well and we keep the area clear arround it. Our season is short but we have lots of deer and elk. The local ranchers sell on the hoof cow or sheep at under one dollar per pound. We want to prepair just in case ???. Fred1938



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 12:10 AM
link   
It's not the size of your "property", it's what you do with it!


Watch these people:
www.youtube.com...

You can grow food right in your house if you have to!
(instead of houseplants)

[edit on 24-2-2009 by dodadoom]



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 12:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Anonymous ATS
 

Hi there! It really is doable, not easy but if you have the tools,
equipment and materials it can definately be done!
There are many articles and books on this very thing, also.
If you wanted I would gather some together,
but it would take a bit of time....

My brother wants to do this also.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join