Yes, it would be a daunting task. Any threat to New Yorkers has a potential to just by being a threat create disaster.

I believe most people think New York would be evacuated in anticipation of any disaster. I don't know if and how possible that is, in large part because most New Yorkers have no cars and would need to rely on methods of mass transportation. About half of the households in NYC have no cars, and within Manhattan about 70% do not have cars. Any attempt to evacuate is going to really tax our the transportation system. Not sure how many people can be evacuated. Leave early.

As much as transportation is an issue, many New Yorkers will have no place to go or no place that is easy for them to get to. So the evacuees may be forced into some very impromptu refugee facilities.

Water is one of the better systems in NYC. If you live in a low enough building, the water is probably going to come in. IN a high rise, the lack of electricity will stop water from being pumped high enough.

Food and recreating a food supply network, heck that could take years. However, I think being able to holdout for a few weeks changes the whole game for anyone. If you make it past the first three weeks, you might be one of very few people around.

Any disaster large enough to threaten a large portion of New Yorkersis also bound to be a threat of some who live near but not in NYC. The metro area has something like 35 Million people.

My supplies would allow DW and myself to bug in for at least a week, and then water becomes an issue. Food will hold out for about a month. I have to think that by then, I would be one of a few New Yorkers or a system would be up and running.

The real decision is when and how to leave.

Sue,
WAY back when, a then co-worker (and now current friend) actually started a novel about NYC - in particular, Manhattan Island (Pop 1.5 milion 22 square miles) getting cut off by terrorists (we stopped right after the first WTC bombing - hit a tad too close to home)

The estimates we could come up with is that the stores would be stripped bare somewhere between 48 and 72 hours. The outer boroughs (Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island) would do somewhat better, and ironically, the Bronx (which IS attached to the mainland) would do worse, simply because I think there are 1-2 supermarkets in the whole Bronx (at the time there were NONE). The Bonx is basically fed by corner markets (Bodegas) and small markets that would have been called a supermarket years ago. Most of the supermarkets were burned out during the blackout of 1977, and never returned

Water is another story - NYC does fairly well on water - most of it's water comes in deep "pressure tunnels" - there are 3 (the third is about 50% finished, but carrys water to at least 2 of the boroughs already - the largest non federally funded public works in history). One GOOD thing, as I've pointed out before, at least at street level, NYC water is NOT pumped, but is gravity fed, and depending on the neighborhood, will/can pressure feed to about the 4-5 floor. The PROBLEM is buildings taller than that - they must (and do) have their own water tanks - with varing capacities vs pump sizes for the building - bigger the tank for the size of the building, the lower the pump capacity to keep the tank topped off - remember that the pump needs to be able to handle peak flow over the time needed to drain the water tank, not absolute peak flow. I was involved in providing Radio Comms during the 2003 blackout. There was only a few buildings that totally lost water, and if the residents were willing to walk to street level, water was available. The big issue then becomes people who CAN'T walk down, in buildings where people won't help each other.

One "funny" issue that happened at one building I went to - it was oh - 6 hours after power was back, and they were just getting water - it seems that a LARGE percentage of the residents of that building turned on their water faucets/tubs/showers etc and left them on to "Know when water came back" - of course, we now have a greater than normal peak flow condition, with an empty water tank - everyone was getting a trickle, and the tank could not fill because the pump alone could not keep up with demand. Part of what we had to do was help management go door to door and convince folks to turn off their faucets/showers etc for about 60 minutes, so they could get a part tank of water up on the roof

I'm of the opinion that you can do anything you want, but there are always consequences. A true adult takes responsibility for their actions. Given a choice between doing something morally repugnant to you and doing something that may end your life, its up to you not me to make that choice. Nor am I required to make that choice easier for you. Having very few religious or moral inhibitions on my diet (animals that live as pets can expect to die as pets being the major one), I have to go off of what I can force down my throat. For now, the list of things I can't is very short.

There is, for good reason, a strong human taboo against corprophagy. I don't know that I could over come that. Rats and pigeons are a potential disease source. But so are quail and rabbit, both of which I've eaten with relish (that is enthusiastically, I think I ate them with gravy). Balut and sweet meats are both delicacies in their respective regions of the world. I'd give them a shot. Heck, I might get the chance to try balut if I take a trip to the Philippines while I'm stationed here. If I do, I'll let everyone know how it tastes.

As for the original idea, getting enough nutrition over a longer term. Its really not that difficult. Between potatoes and milk, a person can survival almost indefinitely. Neither potatoes or goats are all that difficult to raise, and potatoes at least can be stored in a fashion that makes them very difficult to steal. Right in the ground where they were grown. Then there's always the three sisters: corn, beans and squash. A small garden, slightly over grown to disguise how bountiful it is, will keep away the black horseman for a long time.

Umm, you may not like to find this out, but there are places where the NYC water supply mains are within 3 feet of the surface. Not all of the line is deep rock tunnel.

Net daily consumption on the NYC water supply in whole is somewhere just over 1.1 billion gallons per day. One of the deep rock mains is leaking over 1.1 million gallons per day. The good news is the source will never dry up or run out.

When I found out about the shallow lines and their location, I was quite alarmed. The supply still remains quite vulnerable to terrorist activity, should any of them become smart enough to capitalize on such knowledge.

That I know - I used to wn property where Tunnel 2 was directly in back under shallow cover (Across the street from the Old Atwood Schoolhouse) - that said, it'd be hard to take out the whole system - too much redundancy, and there is a LOT of water

I gotta think that those with the best chance of survival become omnivores, if they aren't already. I'll eat grass, ants, and grubs if I have to, I've done it before, and I prefer mine with tabasco sauce. I won't do Armadillo again, I can't get hungry enough to stomach it I guess, and I've tried, at least not the way it was prepared the last time I tried to eat it. I don't know as I could get a spider down either, but if others around me were I might be able to. I'm not quite the omnivore that Bear is, but I am no stranger to hunger.