The walking thread got me thinking about this again, and wondering what you guys thought – if you live in a major metro area and you HAVE to bug out, isn’t the best way to go by water?

Of course it depends on where you live and what your specific options are, and also what boating skills you have. However, many of the cities in the middle of the country were built on the rivers that were the highways of their day, so it’s easy to live in these cities and be within a few miles of a tributary that leads to the vast Mississippi River system. And many of us are fishermen, comfortable with small boats and familiar with local waters.

If you’re in that group, how’s this for a 2-person bug-out strategy? Start with a small fishing boat with a small gas motor, one that gets 50-100 MPG. Take a good hiking bug-out kit, and add to it 2 mountain bikes and another 1000 pounds of selected survival and comfort gear and food. Carry 15-20 gallons of gas. Tow a canoe to carry some of the gear and to give you another water-based option in case you need to abandon the motor boat.

Then, after the disaster strikes and circumstances develop that make it look unwise to try riding it out at home, monitor your path to the water. You will need to have scouted out the tributary running through the city beforehand so that you know under what conditions it’s deep enough to carry you downstream to the Mississippi or other connecting river, and what obstacles there may be (fallen bridges, etc). When the path is clear and those conditions are met, drive to the river with your boats and gear and launch. Travel to a pre-selected wilderness area, and start living the good life until society settles down.

Oh yes, even if you had to paddle or row.

There is a very good reason why the rivers were the highways of the world.

To bad they don't always go where you want to go.

Usually going downstream leads you towards more civilization, not away from it. I suppose with a power boat you could go upstream on large flat slow moving rivers, but those are probably heavily populated along their entire route - upstream and downstream. You might be able to follow a river into a swamp and find wilderness that way. Are there many boat-navigable rivers in the USA that lead into wilderness areas?

I think it depends on which way you might want to go, and local conditions. You might be able to head in only one direction, if the current will allow only travel downstream. If you are seeking to bug out because the local rivers are flooding, then bugging out via might not be a good option.

I've thought of using the East River to get out of NYC, but it's not really a river. The current in it are strong and tidal. If you jump in at the right time, then you should be able to travel a decent distance on one tide. Currents run at about 3-5 knots (slightly more than 3-5 mph). Figuring that you could make an average of about 2 knots over the period of one flood or ebb tide, that's more than I think most can walk in a single day.

The difficulty in depending on this is know you have the boat and other supplies needed. I simply do not have the room to store any type of a baot that I'd want to trust enough to handle the trip. So, I would consider using any of NYC's river as a route to bug-out only as a last option, and it would only occur with me trying to put something together to float on. It's also not something I can practice.

If you have the space and ability to store a boat, then I'd also hope it was not stored solely for purposes of being prepared to bug out.

Finally, I do not see myself heading for the woods during almost any scenario. I'm a human being not a wildnerness animal. Human beings do better in communities.

It's an interesting idea, Bilojax. And I am not trying to pick it apart, but I need to ask a question...

50-100 MPG in a boat?

I need some of the small fishing boaters here to educate me. The last boat I had ran a 200hp Merc/Mariner and pulled down nearly 6 gallons/HOUR. But that was with a decent size boat with a Deep-V hull. I know the smaller and shallower draft boats have to be a lot more effecient than that.

But I still think range has to be a factor if you bug out via small outboard doesnt it?

Well, all the rivers in the central US lead to the Mississippi River, and probably one of the biggest and least known contiguous wilderness area in the US is the area between the levees on the lower-mid Mississippi River, between St Louis and Natchez MS. I don't know the exact dimensions, but the levees are usually 2-10 miles apart and the area is 600 miles long, as the crow flies, or about 800-900 river miles. In some places, such as the mouths of major tributary rivers, the levees are even further apart. Since it is subject to flood, there is very little building or permanent settlement here, and only a limited amount of farming. Most of it is private hunting camps, since fish and game are plentiful throughout the corridor.

Roughly in the middle of that stretch is the mouth of the Arkansas River, where some public land augments the natural flood area, so the wild area becomes very wide as well as very long. Other, smaller rivers also come in near here and centuries of misbehavior by the mouth of the Arkansas have created a maze of channels in the area. That area would be my first choice for a long-term bug-out (I live in Memphis, about 100-150 miles upstream from there).

Other than that, many (perhaps most?) rivers in the US pass through a National Forest, National Wildlife Refuge, or State Wildlife Refuge at some point on their route - there are hundreds of them, covering millions of acres, and all of those are good near term objectives.

Around my neck of the woods, one would become VERY skilled at carrying a boat. Unless you are only crossing a local lake.

I agree with your first point. I have the two boats I mentioned (small fishing boat with motor and canoe), and I use them actively for recreational purposes, so they are a natural choice for a bug out. As long as I stay disciplined enough to keep them properly maintained, packed and stocked, which alas I do not. But I try, and it has the added benefit of keeping me ready for a spur-of-the-moment recreational trip at any time.

I also MOSTLY agree with your 2nd point, which is why I live in a city and not the country. But I see the possibility that, in extreme circumstances, the usually friendly and benficial human community that I like to have all around me could turn on me, and I could be nearly helpless to defend myself, unless I have thought out and prepared a way to do so. That's all I'm suggesting here.

And anyhow, remember CCR and proud mary - river people can be pretty cool too. (Lyrics: "You dont have to worry cause you have no money, People on the river are happy to give.")

BTW, in your situation there is an out similar to mine, and I know some people who are planning to use it (or at least talk like they are, like me - who knows what we'll do if push comes to shove). There is a sport similar to canoeing called Sea Kayaking. It's difficult in some ways and pretty dangerous on its own, so it's not something you'd want to take up solely for the sake of bugging out from a massive terrorist attack. But if you already do it anyway for fun and you build up your skills, it definitely gives you the ability to escape Manhattan on short notice and carrying plenty of survival gear. My friends have paddled before from Manhattan to Delaware Bay in two days - that;s about 100 miles, I think. They paddle the East River regularly, although they don't much like it - too dirty and too many other boats that don't respect small boats.

They're not alone, either - the sport seems to be catching on, somewhat at least. I think they said there was some kind of East River Race this year, and over 100 kayakers showed up for it.

Upon reflection, I’m probably wrong on that 50-100 MPG number. I guess I measured something wrong (starting gas level) or over estimated my distance or something. I need to get a better number for that. My number was based on a test 20 mile run I did on a slow river, 10 miles up and then 10 miles back down, and I thought I only used about 1/4 of a gallon, which would be 80 MPG. I knew it was a small sample so I fudged it to 50-100, thinking that had to cover it. But now that I look it up online, it looks way out of line.

In my defense, the number sounded kind of reasonable if you think of the big differences between auto MPG, motorcycle MPG and dirt bike MPG. Also, just subjectively, when I go out fishing in my zodiac I never use much fuel - I think I use more gas cutting the grass than running the outboard in an average summer. It seems like you can run around forever on a fraction of a gallon of gas. But then, I rarely travel 80 miles when I'm out fishing a lake.

Searching on the internet, I’m seeing numbers like 4 MPG and 6 MPG – the highest is 10 MPG. I'm sure I'm doing better than that - that’s all with bigger boats and bigger engines and bigger propellers and running flat out with boat on a plane. I’m running a new 6HP Tohatsu on an inflatable Zodiac with 400 lbs of boat and contents and usually about half throttle, which gives me a speed of 5-7 MPH. I haven’t yet found any numbers for a setup like that. I also have “lifters” (fin-looking devices) installed at the bottom of the transom and an inflatable keel, which improves the performance. All those things should work for me, although probably not enough to reach anywhere near 80 MPG. Maybe 20 MPG? 30 MPG?

I did find this chart for a 25HP motor on a bigger, but still lightweight zodiac:
RPM MPH GPH MPG
1000 2.4 0.1 47.00
1500 3.5 0.1 34.50
2000 4.5 0.3 14.83
2500 5.3 0.5 10.60
3000 6.0 0.8 7.50
3500 6.9 1.2 5.96
4000 14.2 1.4 10.52
4500 18.2 1.6 11.38
5000 21.3 1.8 11.83


I wonder if those low RPM numbers are a quirk of the testing instruments or if they are real – 47 MPG at 2.4 MPH? I had picked out the half-throttle point as what seemed most efficient, in terms of speed versus how much effort the engine seemed to be making judging by the noise it made. Maybe the secret is to throttle down a little from there.

Bottom line, yes, range matters a great deal, and I purposely favored a small outboard and lightweight boat on the theory that fuel economy is much greater. If that's not true, then it might change my approach somewhat. If it is true then my choices are okay, but I still need to get a better handle on the exact numbers so I can plan better.

There are some other things to consider. Locks and dams being just 2 of them. You might have to portage your boat around a few obstacles like those.

Why you have to evacuate is another one.
For example if it is because of floods you might not want to be on the water at all.

But going by water if ready to do it and with a decent plan is a good way.