Much of my gear is military surplus, simply because it's really good bang for the buck. I try to avoid camo when possible and prefer OD.

All in all, I prefer to stay invisible outdoors. I spend a fair bit of time hiking in the woods or climbing a mountain or two. To me, it's as much a way of staying in shape as it is getting away from the city, the crowds and traffic.

So when I'm in the bush I like to be left alone. When I camp for the night I always pick a quiet spot well away from the trail, some place where the fire won't be seen easily for any distance and I try to blend in with the environment. I also disturb the wildlife a lot less that way and can experience the outdoors much more intensely than the casual hiker.

So far, I've never been in a surival situation outdoors. I guess I'll just keep wearing clothing and gear in OD or any other subdued color, even camo occasionally. 99.9% of the time I spend outdoors is to get away and relax, which means I prefer to keep a low profile. If I ever need to catch attention in the bush, I have many other ways to do that. But I sure won't ruin my entire outdoor experience carrying a bright backpack or some other eye sore. YMMV!

Thanks for the replies thus far, and the tone.

To clarify, I totally undestand the need for camo while hunting (wore it myself). And I also understand the desire for subdued colors while hiking (wear them myself, though I try to make sure my kids have something bright).

But specifically I was asking about bob bags, shtf bags, etc that are designed to be used only in a survival situation. I guess also beyond that, I am asking about s.e.r.e. kits and the mindset in general about wanting to "go commando" in a survival situation vs "be found". I suppose the former is what I think of when I hear folks talk about survival gear/bags/kits in camo and drab colors.

Personally, my "you have 90 seconds to get out of the house and into the truck bags" are Mountainsmith bags. Bright red with yellow trim, logo and pulls. One for mre's, one for gear & light rations, etc. I have a smaller Mountainsmith daypack in each vehicle along with matching waist pack for the kids. Mountainsmith makes pretty tough gear at a fair price. My thinking says they are easy to find in a hurry, easy to spot if WE need to be found, and not so intimidating that we draw attention in a crowd of folks.

So as I reflect more, perhaps I found the answer? If one has hiking/hunting gear and a separate dedicated "uh oh" kit/bags, then bright colors make sense? But trying to do it all with one set of gear means tactical toughness and appearance are a neccessary compromise?

Thanks,

i always though that orange trashbags were for visibility

For me, I simply wear whatever colors I like best. I don't care one way or another about blending in. That means black for urban, and OD or camo for the woods. I never gave it a thought about what others think.

I don't do much hiking or hunting, so the tactical choice for me was just related to the usefulness (pockets, attachment points, and size) and price of the bag. And the fact that it's been well-tested in the toughest of conditions by others, so I know it's good to go.

As others stated, I have a bright blue tarp, orange poncho, metallic blanket, whistle, signal mirror, and other high-visibility items so I'm not to worried if I need to be seen.

In my area, many people prefer not to have to see bright colors on others while out hiking or camping. They feel bright colors take away from their wilderness enjoyment and solitude.

Ok, if you're asking specifically about an "uh-oh" BOB then I guess brightly colored gear would be an advantage as long as you want to draw attention. I remember the story of an experienced hiker who slipped on a mountain trail, tumbled a couple of hundred yards down a steep slope and ended up paralyzed at the bottom of a ravine. He was wearing camo and because he broke his spine there was no way he could move or do anything. The SAR helicopter flew by several times and missed him. He was only found two days later, in bad shape but still alive. So camo is definitely a disadvantage in an extreme case like that and you have a good point there.

By and large though, I can see a lot of potential survival situations (like public disturbance or some disaster causing widespread panic) where I'd much rather get away from the crowds and maintain a low profile. I've experienced first-hand once how people can turn hostile when things go wrong. In general, most folks will not be prepared when disaster strikes. If you happen to be prepared yourself when nobody else around you has the gear and supplies, they might want you to "share" your belongings with them. In a situation like that I'd rather go some place remote and sit it out until the crisis was over. So I guess there's no right or wrong answer. A lot depends on your environment and the people you're dealing with.

I just like all my gear to be black and if I need to be seen then I can pack something more visible.

It all depends. If you are hunting, you might want camo, but you have to remember that if you are moving around at all, that animals hear really well, and people are quite noisy, which kind of defeats the idea of camo. Animals are keyed to colors, but much more to movement. If you are just walking around, hiking or what ever, it doesn't really do any thing except enrich Cabela's and other stores. A friend of mine got a camo pocket knife. Lost it the first week. Put it down, forgot it, went back and couldn't find it. I hunt alot with Aboriginal people, and camo is not even thought about. I think alot about camo is a personal perception. Thats my two cents.

I am with Homer,in that my stuff is in large part black.

However,I can see times when one might want to hide, or be camoflaged. I can without question see times when being able to draw attention can save your life. Isn't it wise to have the ability to do both?

Also, wouldn't what works to camoflage you or anything change as your environment changes? In an urban area, camo might just make you stand out.