Making the rounds of the survival, survivalist, preper, sites I keep running across certain assumptions. A lot of people who have a long laundry list of worse-case situations that they tacitly assume to be nearly inevitable. I'm constantly reading about, know a few people, who have bought into one or more potential threats and take it as read that they are coming.

A friend a few years back read a bunch of articles on dirty bombs and has, since then, assumed that one going off near him is inevitable. So he went out and spent a good part of his savings on gear to deal with the potential situation. He spent thousands dollars for a fancy HEPA filtration system to pressurize the house and safe room, three suits per person, booties and spares, respirators and spare filters, special detergent and dedicated brushes to get nucleotides off of skin, and radiation meters.

Sounds good. It will come in mighty handy if/when such an event goes down in his neighborhood. Fair enough, except for one small issue. He lives in a very small town better than twenty miles away from any likely target. Realistic chances his home will see a dirty bomb or be downwind of one are slim to none.

He hollowed out a good portion of his savings and investments and is now facing a considerable amount of financial pain. Those thousands would be handier right now than all that gear. But he can't sell it and get his money back. Worse still, some of it will have to be replaced if it is to be depended on. Plastics, rubber and especially the filters, all have limited lifespans.

I think he has become a victim of Worst-Case Thinking:
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/05/worst-case_thin.html

Preparation involving expensive gear is not all up-side. Every dollar you spend on it comes from something else. Not all potential scenarios are as likely as all others. Not all gear and provision are universally applicable. More is not always better in all categories. Preparing for the worse possible situation is not always the best way to go.

I too make the rounds of the sites, and each one makes me appreciate ETS a little more. Many of them have some good content, but I'm interested in survival, not survivalism. Despite all the bluster & bravado I think many people would find, if they ever were in a "PAW/TeotWaWKI" situation, that merely existing on for it's own wouldn't necessarily have much appeal. I am a part of a society, a civilization. If that civilization was gone, along with most of the human race, and wasn't coming back, I'm probably not real interesting in fighting the cockroaches for scrap. Not to mention that it's not particularly realistic- I mean, C'mon! If there's a nuclear war, eco-catastrophe or asteroid impact that kills off the bulk of the human race how do you really propose to prepare for that?

Worst case thinking can be insidious. In small doses it serves as a reality check, a warning that the comforts and conveniences that we take for granted can be fragile. But if you get your utilities disconnected because you spent all your money on a generator, isn't that sort of a false economy? I'm all for being prepared but I try to prepare for the scenarios I'm most likely to face. After all, I can't afford to build a 100' deep concrete bunker and stock it with 2 years food and frozen DNA samples of 2 of each of Earth's animals! But I can keep a couple days food and water on hand, and a lantern, matches, kerosene and candles around in case a T-storm knocks out my power (one summer if happended 5 times, the longest for about 6 hours).

Great post, Art!

BTW, one area where WCT smacks me in the face is my IFAK. If I put 3 ABD pads in there, it seems like I should have 5. Then I add a roll of Kerlix and I think, "wouldn't 3 rolls be better?" You can see where this is headed! There's only so much room in my IFAK (a Maxpedition F.I.G.H.T., very nice bag but not huge). If I cram it full of gauze, I have no room for any meds. If I stuff in all the meds I can think of there's no space for hemostatics. And then I'll read an article about the guy who got shot thru both legs and needed two tourniquets! And I don't even have one!

There's gotta be a balance between prepared and realistic. A 20 lb FAK would solve any medical issue I'm competent to address but it would usually be sitting at home where it wouldn't help me. Stock as well as you can but the best kit is the kit you've got on you at the time.

EDIT: I just read the full article. Very nice! It shows what happens when we tend to think Black Swans are common occurrences.

You are right on with this post. The most important part of emergency planning involves a realistic risk assessment. This should be followed with a thoughtful and well researched action plan and only then, the procurement of necessary (and preferably multi-purpose) supplies and equipment.

You can't be hermetically sealed against the rain, you just need an umbrella.

Without knowing all the details, I would guess that this gentleman might have been adequately served (mostly psychologically) by having food and water for a week and an all-hazard radio (multi-purpose). For the radiological threat; an evacuation plan for every wind direction, or if he preferred to sit tight; some plastic sheeting and duct tape for windows, iodine tabs, and some decent dust masks. Maybe a $150 invested in the radiological threat.

My worst Case thinking is..

Flood: Likely to happen, happened in 1992.

Hurricane: Never going to reach this far inland, Dont need to prepare for it.

Eatrhquake: It happened earlier, I dont remember when but, I should prepare a little.

Avalanche:...Yeah Right!!!

Land Slide: I live on flat land!

Volcanoes: None around!

Blizzards: Maybe, not likely, I have stuff for cold and snow.

Drought: have 55 gallons stored and maintained!

Hail Storms:... What can you do..

Health Epidemic: I am not prepared for besides Germ-X

To protect his property this chap is thinking about modifying the cannon he used to shoot his wife out of, as a deterrent against vandals who have previously damaged his property. His siege catapult wasn't working too well.


Break in and make my day!!

As with most things, a little worst-case thinking is good, but any excess is bound to be bad for you.


I really like the perspective that having the resources to live "off the grid" for a limited time will give you a healthy buffer against the smaller predicaments that are more likely to occur. (Insert favorite bad-weather episode here, imagine truck drivers going on strike for a week, or power blackouts).


In the same vein, preparing for having to leave your home and most of your possessions behind is good advise. I am hinking along the lines of bug-out bags (or bug-out suitcases with wheels on them) and Blast's survival binder.


I don't buy into the "we need minimum one year supply, atomic bunker in our garden and a retreat in North Dakota" kind of survivalism. That is binding up too much resources into a highly unlikely pet fantasy scenario. I don't mind people having weird hobbies, but at least find a weird hobby that won't make your whole family economy revolve around it, will you?


No one has so far mentioned preparing against burglary, robbery and such - which happens every day, somewhere to someone.

I work in midtown Manhattan. Each and every day I see:

- Radiation detection equipment (fixed and mobile)
- Biohazard detectors
- Armed soldiers on patrol with leg-mounted gas mask bags
- HEAVILY armed cops on patrol (way more armament than the soldiers)
- Scores of emergency apparatus
- Metal detectors
- Bomb-sniffing dogs
- Reinforced glass windows (for bomb protection)
- Tens of thousands of cameras
- Millions of people

I have been here for the first WTC bombing, blackouts, steam explosions, bomb scares, plane crashes, riots and transit strikes. I managed to skip 9/11, fortunately. The bulls-eye of "worst case scenarios" is centered on my head.

And I too ponder why, exactly, near my home, which is 74 miles from the place I work, in place with limited cell phone service, where I can hunt in my back yard and we have no municipal water or sewer, no sidewalks, no streetlights, no police department, few large structures, no critical infrastructure, why do so many of my neighbors think that WE live in a "target" zone? Clearly they have no idea what "risk assessment" is.

Martin, with any (bad) luck, these hostile space aliens that the eminent Dr. Stephen Hawking was interviewed about the other day will land smack dab outside your office, cutting off any chance of escaping or even getting any take out food.

I have to wonder where some of us draw the line between preparedness and simply doing something like a hobby--because it's interesting to us? Do I really need a dozen different types of firearms to have a complete range of weapons in case of...well, heck, not sure, but in case of something. Or to be honest, just simply because you really like guns?! Or building an underground shelter and stocking it with all the attendant gadgets? Or buckets of junk silver and handfuls of gold coins? Like Phaedrus was pointing out, do these folks really want to survive whatever worst case calamity they are ostensibly preparing for? Or is it just fun to prepare for such situations?

Personally, I think most worst case scenario types are more like hobbyists, although I certainly don't want to leave out the True Believers either. Certain traumatic events can certainly turn people into True Believers, at least temporarily. And there are also the easily swayed masses, but I don't think they tend to spend as much time and money on exotic preps as the hobbyists and True Believers.

OK, back to reality. Gosh darn it...where did I leave my nerve gas antidote self-injector? It was right here this morning!

The Crypto-Gram is on my monthly reading list when it comes out, and I saw his comments on worse case scenarios. I was reminded of my younger brother. He lives outside Lubbock, and he's convince there'll be a suitcase nuclear bomb, so he's bough a year's worth of food from the local dehydrated survival place (at least he's spending his money locally). I asked him why he though Lubbock was on the terrorists' list, and he said he expects a suitcase nuclear bomb in LA or San Francisco and the fallout will drift over Lubbock. He's serious.

I pointed out the size of a suitcase nuke, but he's emotionally invested in his belief of a suitcase nuke in California destroying life as he knows it in Lubbock. The facts of fallout reaching Lubbock in life-destroying amounts from California are of no interest to him.

He's much more likely to get hit by a tornado, more likely to suffer a blizzard, so I hope all that dehydrated food gets some use, although I don't know where he'll get the water if his house is wiped out in a tornado. Or where he'll find a pot to cook in.

C'est la vie.