Good idea Dangphool. This is an easy one too. We can simply build a supply depot on the property of the person closest to the Village, and have everyone stock up on supplies as they arrive. Standardization is also a great idea, and one that will require some considerable thought. .223s or 7.62? Questions, questions.

Screedcrete, I affirm the wisdom of your statement. We need to get together and discuss things. I made a topic posting possible meeting times, do you guys already have a time and location specified?

My son is at UBC, I have given thought the safest way out of UBC area in most situation of extreme duress to b accounted for is perhaps by boat with a rendezvous point .

My son is at UBC, I have given thought the safest way out of UBC area in most situation of extreme duress to b accounted for is perhaps by boat with a rendezvous point .

Possible but risky. UBC has some rather draconian rules. You'd have to convince them to allow you to keep your boat there, or have a person with a boat come around and pick them up. Feasible if you already have a boat, methinks.

DELETED

Howdy All,

Just been reading over your thread. Hope you don't mind if I drop in a suggestion or two.

Observation. UBC to Hope. Power boat up the Fraser, would seem (from a distance) the fastest method of transport. To use a number posted elsewhere, 2.4 Million people trying to escape up country. ALL land routes will become clogged in short order. The solution suggested involves a boat, the challenge involves university campus rules. You know both parts, so the evac plan should include a water pick up by a second or third party - preferably a member of your group who has a river boat that can swing in to an RV near UBC to extract your group member and move them up the Fraser. Possibly picking up more members along the route. Thus, getting your strength in numbers and moving to your final RV sooner. Risk on the river cannot be greater than the risk on the highways, at least in the beginning hours. Once the highways become parking lots, I think they will become very dangerous, even for prepared like-minded folks. Just my 2 cents.

As for the idea of having a time table of RV's to link up and move further up country with a progressively larger group. This make a lot of sense. Plan now and succeed later. This is like a mutual aid agreement only larger in scope but still with a common purpose. Work this out, it is worth solving. It makes sense for all your groups to have known objectives to RV at. This will also allow the stockpiling of gear, rations, water, etc enroute. Thus you can leave with less if you had to, and still have supplies waiting for you further down the line. As noted in other posts, if a group has to take a new route, they know where the RV's are, so they can still link up. If they also know when the main body is expected at a particular RV, they can hold the position and wait. This planning will take a bit of coordinating, but achievable.

The End Game Plan. Where to go?? If you take the route towards Merritt, there is a lot of crown land before you hit the old toll booths. If, the groups do a recce, you may locate an out of the way piece of crown land to sit on until the crisis is over. Of course, owning a piece of land would be better. But that leads to the question, who will buy it and who will own it??

Yes, standardization is a group survival skill. Batteries, ammo, stoves, water filters, vehicle parts, bikes, tents, etc. If you can be standardized, then do so. As for the 5.56 vs 7.62, standardization. Save the grief, use both. 5.56 for persons with smaller body sizes and 7.62 for larger persons. But that is something I guess you all will workout.

Best success,

Mountainman.

Why head east? There is an island to the west providing a nice natural barrier for the bulk of the 2.3 million to NOT reach.

jonesy, I will add to your comment that there are multiple islands in the southern salish sea area , depending on the nature of the situation, there are even islands in the middle of the fraser river where one could arrange a group meeting location for a group or perhaps designate it as where they were to ride out difficulty . I think in any dire situation particularly any scenario where vast regions are in crisis and external aid is not forthcoming , the bulk of the population who would leave the city to find what they need can exit via bridges out to surrounding areas . I think it easy enough to render the sea to sky highway impassible but east into the Fraser valley or funneling out of it via Hope is where I think conventional thinking will guide people , and they will use vehicles as the means to get to some sort of help or where their needs might be met . I am just pointing out that in the fraser valley east west travel by boat , even if it took a few days to reach the rendezvous points , maybe be the safest way around various points of the city of Vancouver and the fraser valley . My plan was if there were say a bad earthquake to pick up my son at UBC by boat or have him equipped with a kayak to avoid overland travel in a dire situation . If you plan to use relay stations to get out of the valley as a group to bug out is something differing from rallying to stay in one bug in location as a group . Perhaps both scenarios might be addressed by the group if one were to form, as a cohesive means to deal with varying emergencies.
Jonesy's point is a good one conventional migration behaviour for the bulk of the population would in all likelihood be to migrate north via the sea to sky or east via the many bridges or over land. Which is why my bug out would be the opposite direction .

Just imagine the chokepoint at Hope. Great place for law enforcement/military/criminals to relive you of excess supplies and weaponry. Float downstream and consider going opposite the herd, as syn said.

Good points. But if you're prepared to walk out instead of drive, that opens up many more routes both North and east. Also it's a good idea to map out and avoid potential checkpoints. Setup caches. and have your BOB seasonal i.e. snowshoes for the winter.

I really think going by boat is the best way to go. Going by boat allows the transportation of a considerable amount of goods over a terrain that will never be damaged by roadblocks, earthquakes, or other factors that can make cement roads all but useless. Boating out of the fraser valley, unless your in the far east, seems like the definite and safest route to go.

Im pretty sure the Japanese would disagree thats the best way to go after an earthquake. The ensuing tsunami afterwards come to mind:p it depends on the situation though. It's good to have options. and multiple routes planned.

Are we not shielded by Vancouver island, by and large? There has not been a tsunami hit the fraser valley for thousands of years, although there has been the large earthquakes.

http://www.richmond.ca/safety/prepare/city/hazards/tsunamis.htm

The situation in Japan is completely different. They face the ocean, whereas we have rings and rings of small and large islands as well as submerged banks that absorb the waves.

After the aftershocks end, the waters would be the ideal transportation route, provided we know where we are going and have a big enough boat and a place to go already set up.

The fraser delta is low risk but the sunshine coast and other area the risk increases.flooding will lhappen regardless of a wave impact though. Also since jonsey mentioned the hope choke point, u may want to consider the river systems equally have chokepoints too. and if hiding is a concern, its a lot harder to hide a boat on a river than a person in a forest. Not knocking anyones plan, just giving some points to consider. Theres an island with an abandoned military bunker on it. Forget the name, ill find out. But i would consider that as a location if i was heading that way.

Aaron, are you talking about the island that was used as an outpost in ww2??

I consider an earthquake a localized catastrophe that means sitting tight here , if even for a few weeks will see relief efforts from the outside unless the world is in some strife , in which case we probably should not be in place here at that point anyways . After an earthquake unless forwarned of a tsunami over 90 metres , 5 miles inland , I am good and in defense mode but helping others as I can . Low lying areas, besides liquefaction of the soils , know this, earthquakes standards are only to accommodate a 8.2 including dykes , road infrastructures etc. , and I think the number of aftershocks could be a wildcard that sees more damage than anyone anticipated with earthquake standards . Anything crazier than an earthquake I am woefully unprepared for at present .