We are making an error in identifying the purpose of the original list. The list, I would assert, was not created by experts in urban survival attempting to guide intelligent cityfolk in survival methods. It was actually developed by a low-ranking public relations flack who was assigned the task of filling 8 column-inches with material that will not offend any significant lobbying group. The flack (been there, done that) hurriedly googled the topic, did a cursory reading of the items with big print and lots of pictures, and cranked out the first draft. The draft was then submitted to the political correctness committee, which edited out any references to race, religion, political preference, gender, place of national origin, immigrant status, guns, knives, bodily functions, height, weight, or hair color. The revised draft was then reviewed by the department head,who edited out all the adverbs, and submitted to IT for placement on the website. It was then reviewed by IT's graphic designers and code monkeys, who revised it to fit the available space and to conform to the layout requirements.

The finished product has little to do with the original tasking, but it won't offend anyone, and if it doesn't turn out to be adequate advice for survival, the non-survivors will be in no condition to complain, or more to the point, to vote, so who cares?

Looking for quality survival guidance on a government site is as silly as looking for such guidance from Bear Grylls, or Wile E. Coyote.