Retreat planning- types of retreats Part 2

[1Admin]

continued from Part 1-

On to the "live in the country but really close to town" idea. This was one of Mel Tappan's ideas. It stemmed from the idea that country folks were more self-sufficient (they used to be), used to sharing things with neighbors and that the welfare mentality wasn't present in the country. For the most part, I think this idea isn't as feasible in today's world as it was in the days of Sherrif Taylor and Aunt Bea.

People just are not what they used to be. Living in the country, it's nothing to see regular busts in the newspapers for meth labs, marijuana growing, spousal and child abuse and other serious crimes.

As to people being more self-sufficient. A casual ride through a given country area in the summertime (when gardens and signs of animal raising will be more than evident) will prove that at best, 50% of country folks even grow a garden or raise animals anymore. I'm being very liberal with the 50%

Now, when you do your casual ride, notice also the amount of broken down mobile homes, barefoot children, cars up on blocks or with gr*** growing higher than the car around it, etc. These are all signs of poverty in my opinion. Not knocking anyone here, but let's be frank. They all show a lack of responsibility as well. Make inquires as to the number of people on welfare, WIC and similiar programs at the county offices, you will get a better idea what I'm talking about.

You may see hundred acre fields of corn, cotton, peanuts, etc. but keep in mind these are for the most part, commercial farms. Farmer John sells them at market. He may or may not keep some for himself. He may sell all his corn at market, then his wife may buy corn at StuffMart.

As to the commercial type farms- most are highly dependent on fertilizers, pesticides, regular purchases of new seed (I haven't met a large farmer yet that even knew what "non hybird seed" meant) and of course black gold-oil. Pull any of these from the equation and production is at best hampered and at worse, shut down completely.

Like Barnes says in "Platoon" - "..any when the machine breaks down, WE break down."

"You from roun here?"
One thing for certain you will not escape is the fact that you are an outsider that has moved into the area. To say that small towns are "clanish" is a major understatement. It won't take "a year or so" to get accepted into a small town, it may take forever.

A local realtor I was talking with one time told me a story of a lawyer that moved to the small town 30 years before. After a few years of being considered an outsider, he opted to do some public service type projects such as sponsoring a kids baseball team, etc. to try to get people to recognize and accept his name. Long and short of the story is that after 30 years of living there, being an active part of the community, etc. and he was still considered "that out of town lawyer" and people were suspicous of him. Guess I can't really blame them, I mean, he is a lawyer.... LOL

My point in this is that if you are not 110% accepted as being part of the small town, your better off 10 miles outside of town by yourself. If you are not completely accepted, you cannot count on anyone's help from the community when times get tough. You might be able to prove me wrong and make it work, but I haven't met many that have.

So what didn't we cover yet? Ah yes, the be off totally on your own, lone retreat on the top of the mountain type view.

Disadvantages of this plan are many also. It will be harder to barter with people, you still won't be "known" to townsfolk. It's virtually impossible for a small family to truly defend a retreat by themselves. Their will most likely be a shortage of skills- how many small families have a doctor, dentist, farmer, herbalist, carpenter, electrician, tactician, hunter gatherer, commo man, etc?

Advantages of this plan- Isolation can be a plus after the fact. The point people need to realize is that SOMEONE will know about your retreat. An absolute secret retreat is pretty close to impossible. Delivery of building materials, fuels, electric company, phone company, etc. Even just a hunter following a wounded animal could expose your retreat. Forget the notion that your retreat is going to be 100% secret, it ain't gonna happen.

The only way I see this plan working is to have the isolated type retreat with a working survival group. The group must be large enough to be able to mount a 24/7 guard duty plus put out regular patrols for early warning, raise and preserve food, make repairs to necessary equipment, etc. A 3 man group is not going to be able to do this. The earliest this starts to take place is in the 8-10 person range (not counting dependents) and you'd be a lot more comfortable in the 12-20 range. Any more than 20 and you better get good at delegation.

Here I go being pragmatic again, but I feel you have to be a part of a functioning survival group if you are going to make this last plan work.

See you again soon. -RH

[Chin]

[QUOTE=1Admin;56]continued from Part 1-

The only way I see this plan working is to have the isolated type retreat with a working survival group. The group must be large enough to be able to mount a 24/7 guard duty plus put out regular patrols for early warning, raise and preserve food, make repairs to necessary equipment, etc. A 3 man group is not going to be able to do this. The earliest this starts to take place is in the 8-10 person range (not counting dependents) and you'd be a lot more comfortable in the 12-20 range. Any more than 20 and you better get good at delegation.

Here I go being pragmatic again, but I feel you have to be a part of a functioning survival group if you are going to make this last plan work.

I am intested in developing this topic further. Having military background and being familiar with standard watch practices, the smallest group of able bodied adults that I have been able to figure can be used as a defense force is 9. I'd like to get your thoughts.

[Lowdown3]

Depends also on how much your looking to cover. A smaller, tighter perimeter could conceivably (although not the best option) be covered with just one OP.

With just one OP, 24 hours in a day and 8 people = 3 hour watches. Which is very doable.

Up it to two OP's, 24 hours in a day and 8 people = 6 hour watches. Four people on 1 OP divided by 24 hours. In other words running two simultaneous OP's 24/7 those eight people would have 6 hour watches every day.

That is doable also IMO but will cut down greatly on the amount of time that can be used for food production and other necessary homesteading tasks.

Patrols would by necessity be small- 2 to 4 people. It's important to remember that patrols would likely be short range, covering maybe a mile or so. While the last thing you want to do is rush them, this could be done in 3-4 hours.

[Chin]

I agree with you in that an OP and roving patrol are essential elements to security.

For my purposes, I use a 5 acre parcel with 6 buildings as my hypothetical. (Not just for security, but all things).

I would also say that it is vital to have a gate sentry at the entrance to the retreat/compound. You will want even friendlies, with whom you may barter or share intel, to know that your group takes security seriously. An armed and fortified entry point conveys this.

Also, I would rather a perimeter sentry in addition to area patrols. This gives you a 3 person fire team in seconds.

That would mean that the security detail would consist of 3 positions. (1) Gate Sentry (2) Observer (3) Perimeter Sentry.

So, these 3 individuals are Squad A. There is then obviously, Squads B and C.

While Squad A is on watch, Squad B is the 'ready' squad. Squad C is off and most likely asleep.

That would allow for 2 fire teams to repell boarders if required. With a decent defenders advatage, say 3-1, A force of 15 could be held off.

This requires everyone to pull an 8 hour watch everyday in addition to the days workload. And nobody gets a day off. I think it could be done, but it would be taxing over the long haul. And this only accounts for physical security of the immediate compound. it has not allocated people for off premise patrol, which will be vital to long term security. When that is added, you would need another squad of 3. For a total of 12.

That's how I came up with a minimum of 9, anyway.

[1Admin]

Good post Chin. Obviously the more people available the more can be done. 9-12 is a good number.

Small enough to manage well, large enough to present a problem to threats.

[Chin]

Thanks. But understand that is what I think is a BARE minimum. And it only includes the adult males and boys old enough to fight. (I don't believe in women and children in combat). So the minimum number I could see in a survival compound situation would be around 25 or so. That's MINIMUM. I know many don't agree with this. It's just my opinion.

[Boyd]

Thanks. But understand that is what I think is a BARE minimum. And it only includes the adult males and boys old enough to fight. (I don't believe in women and children in combat). So the minimum number I could see in a survival compound situation would be around 25 or so. That's MINIMUM. I know many don't agree with this. It's just my opinion.

Chin, I totally respect your opinion, but my kids from 10 - 19 have been part of my "home guard" since they could shoot a rifle. My 15 year old daughter can stand toe to toe with any full grown man physically, and still has dates to prom since she was a freshman.. It's all attitude, preparedness, and motivation...

She isn't a part of the weaker sex dead lifting 500lbs, benching 250, squatting 500+ and wears a miniskirt.. Just don't tell her that her arms are big... she might bust you one.. :)

[eeyore]

Years ago, Jeff Cooper wrote an article called “Notes on Rural Defense” (For the Private Citizen in Times of Disorder). Cooper’s evaluation was of 24/7 security and the number of adults necessary to keep a rotating security and work schedule on an on going basis with out ultimately facing burnout. Conclusion was that the smallest group that can maintain a secure, long term lookout is 10. I am not sure if anything but the most rudimentary patrolling is feasible for groups under 10 adults as it leaves the retreat with out many defenders; so too are lost valuable work and rest hours.

I wish i had the Personal Survival Letter that was in, maybe someone does and can post the whole thing.

You could do the 8 hours shifts for a while, but with all the other stress during that time, 4 hours would be better. So if you went in the middle and said 6 hour shifts, you would need 4 a day for each position. If you had just one OP and just one person paying attention to them, that is 8 shifts each day. If you sent out a 2 man patrol or they just walked the perimeter that the OP could not see, that 10 people involved every day.

When you add in people to get would, garden, secure water, livestock, cooking, cleaning, you need a real amount of people.

Could you pull 8 hour shifts, sure but not for long

[thereisnospoon]

So this might get long, but aren't there other options to just your team guarding your retreat?

We fall into the "move into a small town and get to know the people" crowd. Population 491 as of 2000 census. Great neighbors so far. They've helped a lot and lent tools and local knowledge.

Three failies on the property (77 acres). 3 adult males. We are going to work as a team to defend our area much like detailed above, but there is no way to protect or repell an invasion of even a small force with just three guys and a young man (whose a great shot, btw.)

So, we are also meeting with our neighbors up and down the road about our "neighborhood watch" program. Most are receptive. We also contacted the local sherriff before staring our meetings. I had reservations, but better to get it over with so that we weren't later accused of trying to usurp authority. He was not only receptive, but has encouraged us and attended a few meetings to help us get the pint across. He was very candid about his men and their service if a shtf event taks place-no illusions about where they'll be-home taking care of their family, probably with his guns and ammo...

So, we've established pods of people up and down the road and in any area we can that will communicate and respond to problems, should the arise, be oit a fre, a tornado or a big time SHTF event.

[Lowdown3]

Community outreach can and should definitely be another part of it.

But we have to consider the difference between getting folks together to talk during good times where everything is plentiful, and getting folks you don't really know together during bad times when EVERYTHING is suddenly scarce.

Personally, I have some extra food that we plan to distribute to a few SELECT folks in the community as discreetly as possible.

However if people are not prepared well ahead of time, I don't think we can truly relay on them, at least in the way I think about relaying on someone. Not saying you "can't" for sure relay on these folks, just saying that sitting around talking now with a full belly is much different than looking at a starving child post breakdown of law and order.

The "community" idea IS a good one, however it requires that everyone be more or less on the same footing. That means if 4 of these families are starving and your obviously doing fine, will that work? Probably not.

I think it's akin to the "handout weapons to my unarmed sheeple neighbors" that people that live in subdivisions talk about. How long does a mercenary typically fight for WITHOUT PAY? Don't arm them if you can't FEED them in that case.

Bruce Clayton wrote an excellent article back in 1980 or 81 about how he was fixing to buy another set of HK91's and he started thinking through the dilemma of fighting his neighbors. Why did he HAVE to fight them? He would have to fight them because they were starving- of course some are just dirtbags irregardless, but you get the point.

So Clayton postulated in this article that it would be better to use the roughly $1,500. (then) for the rifles and instead buy that $$ amount of wheat. He had it worked out where he would be able to feed something like everyone within a 1/2 or 1 mile (rural area) for six months with that food. He would distribute it out to them POST event. Then everyone in the area would have something of value to protect and of course when their food for the little ones, they'd be less apt to risk their lives stealing his.

This isn't an option for everyone and it would be EXTREMELY HARD to do discreetly but it was an interesting idea never the less.

400 lbs. of staple items given out to neighbors post event wouldn't cost you much, and it would put everyone at least near the same plane as you being prepared.

Thoughts on this?

[thereisnospoon]

I agree completely that we have to be careful and also thoughtful about the people we approach.

We started by approaching our immediate neighbors, who had been extremely helpful from the moment we purchased the property. They are each different, but all the same...and all believe there are hard times ahead and are "putting up" for it. All three have gardens and the tools to work them (which they have lent to us, as we prepare our location...). All three have lived ion the area their entire lives, if not right in that spot.

We then approached their local relatives and friends (who also happen to live on our road or close by) and they are of like mind.

Now, the truth is, we don't get to go into their homes or their pantries and check their stores any more than they'll get access to ours. Nor do we truely know their constitution. However, you can see a garden and animals from the road and those people attract our attention first and foremost. It takes a hardy person to plant, water and tend. Those people will usually follow through on whatever they say.

If we come upon a place that has a lot of junk in the yard and multiple cars on blocks (that's a rich guy in North Alabama!) and unkempt, overgrown property...we move along. It's might be a mistake, but in general, those are not people who follow through...

Not everyone who cries "here am I" will be GTG if the balloon goes up. Each of us will have to fight the urges to give up or give in.

The plan is basically an extension of the idea of layered security. We have pods that have a circular area of responsibilty. Eventually, we hope these pods will overlap and work in conjunction with one another from our house in all directions, all the way to the main roads that lead to the general area.

We are encouraging those who we talk to to prepare, depending on needs and ability. Some of these folks will be able, some will need help-they inturn can offer things we need...hopefully. It's not perfect, nor can it be. Unless you have direct control (like a boss or drill sargeant) it's up to each individual to prepare himself. We'll be capable of providing for ourselves and then some, but not as much as some of the others until we actually get onsite and get busy..2-3 years??

It's easier to fight the hun while he is far off than right at the door.

Spoon