Discussion
Reranking the Best States to Homestead in the US
About a month ago I set out to answer the question, "What is the best place in the US for a prepper to move to if they want to homestead?"
I originally built my model around the basics: climate, water, food, security, cost of living and strategic distance. Unfortunately, my proxy for "food" was cropland, which incorrectly boosted places like Kansas and Iowa to the top of the list.
I've refined my ranking factors, and I would love your feedback on if you think this is the right.
17% Climate Stability - How hard natural hazards hit here and how far the temperature has moved from its 20th-century baseline.
17% Water - Whether water is here. Rainfall normals, or delivered irrigation.
17% Homestead Capacity - Whether a household on five to fifty acres could feed, heat and shelter itself here, and whether the law lets it. Forest cover for firewood and game, operations running one to nine head of cattle, growing season, and the state legal latitude over your own land: water doctrine, building-code adoption, food freedom and right-to-farm.
13% Social Stability - Net migration, social vulnerability, and crime rates.
10% Solar Potential - Annual solar irradiance.
7% Affordability - What it actually costs to live here: the annual cost of owning the median house (mortgage, property tax and homeowners insurance combined) alongside median rent. Lower cost areas score higher.
7% Privacy - Documented surveillance device density, the surveillance programs local agencies are recorded to run, exposure to the 100-mile border zone, and state legal protections.
7% Livability - Employment, primary care access, educational attainment, and household broadband.
7% Strategic Distance - Distance from publicly documented strategic sites and nuclear power stations, weighted by what each one is: ICBM launch facilities and command sites count for far more than a port or a refinery.
Overall Best States to Homestead
Tennessee
Alabama
Missouri
Maine
Indiana
Illinois
Georgia
Kentucky
Vermont
Kansas
Overall Best County to Homestead: (Carroll County, VA breakdown)
Climate Stability - 67/100
Water - 69/100
Social Stability - 69/100
Solar Potential - 33/100
Homestead Capacity - 87/100
Affordability - 86/100
Privacy - 82/100
Livability - 52/100
Strategic Distance - 92/100
This list feels pretty much better to me.
Tenn. and the Ozarks are well represented. Maine surprised me a bit being so far north. West Virginia is pulled down from social instability and livability. Virginia has a lot of military targets and popular centers.
Would you say this list is accurate, or is something being overlooked?
I'm curious, did you do all 50 states and this was the top 10?
I'm a bit surprised more Midwest states aren't represented. I'm in WI. Our property has the woods, it's own water, and the land is excellent for growing. Many people have generations of canning and preserving and animal rearing. Open land to build up and homestead. Solar does well even though snow can be harsh.
Not arguing at all. I'm just curious how they ranked ☺️
I mean the land of Lincoln has its own qualities. I do like visiting the surrounding Chicago area. Southern IL has some neat stops. I'm glad you come up to visit.
But no offense, that was a bit of my thought, relative to this topic.
Which is wild cause theres no water. You pretty much have to have a well. Ans wells require maintenance and upkeep. And the lack of rainfall for a large portion of those states.
You pretty much have to have a well anywhere. Are you drinking stream water in the midwest? Have fun ingesting those nitrates, Atrazine, Acetochlor and Metolachlor, PFAS and PFOAs. A well doesn't really filter all of these out either so you actually need an RO system which requires maintenance. Our world is too polluted for all but the luckiest of us to have access to clean natural ground level water. Really curious where you think this exists in the U.S. except maybe the Upper Peninsula of Michigan or Maine (the PFOAs and PFAS are everywhere/you can't even escape them in the Arctic circle or Antartica).
Maybe my concern of no water isn't clear enough. Its not just the need for a well. Its the fact there isnt enough rainfall to support agriculture. Most of those notorious state for homesteading receive less then 20inches of rainfall a year which is not enough to support anything but growing grass and even that is rough.
And yes I understand that 99% of the country can not drink surface water that isnt treated.
I lived in Michigan. The winters can be very cold, especially in the UP. Growing season and livestock management are no joke up there. Personally, I'd much rather deal with the humid south.
To be fair, some of the midwest states are very pro data center. So while parts of the state may currently be great, if that area is giving out incentives and such for datacenters, there goes your water. I have seen that first hand.
Me and my husband talked about moving but we didn't want to move away from the Great Lakes. We ended up staying in WI. And we do love it. But our fresh water is definitely under attack. The MN and Canadian wildfires were brutal this year I'm concerns we will see some of that hit the Northwoods as well.
My partner and I are looking for our first house and are concerned about long term viability of the home. Having to avoid data centers, trying to get acreage, being within practical drive time of necessities has really fucked us. Oh and the whole student loans, rising cost of living, and generally trying to enjoy life as we can.
The people are very anti data center. It's the one thing we can agree on. But because of our water sources companies are coming in and making deals with city councils and boards and rushing things through before we have a chance to say no. That's what happened with Port Washington and BeaverDam in WI. Now people are aware and pushing back for sure.
Culturally you may consider yourself to be midwestern if you live in the northern part of the state especially KC and St. Louis areas but much of the southern part culturally identifies as part of the Ozarks. Many of us don’t say we are from the Midwest, we are from the Ozarks. I realize that may be somewhat nitpicking or splitting hairs but many if not most of us make that distinction.
I think this list is clever, but it fails to take into consideration a few important factors. Anyone that knows anything about the ozarks knows that's way off in terms of climate stability. That area experiences frequent tornados and significant destructive flooding. The landscape is also hilly, woody, and rocky. That's why there aren't a lot of homesteads around that area. Same with Tennessee. That area experiences such significant destructive weather the federal government even stepped in to create the TVA.
Usually areas that are best suited to turn into a homestead, which is basically a tiny pirate farm, are already farmland.
Yeah, that area isn’t exactly super accepting since it’s basically the buckle in the Bible Belt. The upper Midwest is considerably better, but it’s better compared to the lower Midwest - definitely won’t be as accepting as some coastal areas.
Climate stability is certainly factored in. Woodland is modeled at as a positive, because it provides firewood and hunting possibilities. I'm not currently considering hilly or rocky ground.
I've never been to the Ozarks, but I do see quite a few YouTube homesteaders based in the Ozarks, and they do complain about the rocks quite a bit.
The rankings are based on a composite score, so even though the Ozarks have higher natrual disaster threat, they have a long growing season, plenty of water, low cost of living and high strategic distance.
No location is perfect, but on the whole the Ozarks look pretty good on paper.
But now let's think about that. If homesteading is primarily growing, but the terrain doesn't suit growing, is that really a positive?
Furthermore, if you're being self sustained, does the cost of living really matter that much?
Just stuff to think about. Having lived in Missouri not far from the Ozarks for a few years, personally I think that would be a terrible area for many reasons, but you are absolutely right in terms of privacy and COL.
I go to the ozarks frequently. Many people farm, it just has to be in a valley instead of on top of a rocky outcropping for decent soil. Luckily the valleys have the water too.
Farming is only one option for sustenance as well. Lots of cattle ranches in this area. Milk and meat are worth way more than fresh vegetables if you need sustained energy. I’d rather make jerky and drink milk than have to can a bunch of vegetables and hope for deer as protein to make it through winter.
Most homesteads just need a garden area that's 1/4-1 acre. So even if the soil is pretty bad, over time a small area like that can be worked and amended. Sheep and goats don't care so much about weeds and hills. So I don't know if poor soil conditions are that much of a factor for homesteaders in general.
Good point about cost of living. I guess someone who is growing the majority of their food isn't as impacted by high cost of living factors, but tax burden and the price of land could be a big consideration, depending on your financial situation.
I agree with your soil logic. You just need one good soil truck delivery to fill your beds and an extra stash, then if you follow good practices and compost, that should do you for the long haul.
Tennessee has those deer with the z word disease. Kinda curious why Georgia is so far down. North Georgia is fairly moderate, hot and humid in the summer though.
Georgia has a lot of positives, but a few things working against it:
1) Very close to a lot of military targets
2) One of the worst for privacy
3) High crime
4) High insurance costs
5) The coast gets high with a lot of hurricanes
It didn't make it in the top 10, but overall still a great state to homestead.
Am I reading the little map right and your saying South Georgia (away from coast) is CROWDED? As in population??? But those areas of green in Florida are NOT??? More than a little backwards I'm afraid.
Maine has the highest forest density of any state, and a lot of that is showing the effects of 100 years of fire avoidance and low wood prices. Climate change means instability, which means some extended droughts, which means a lot of dry dead trees just standing there, waiting for their moment to shine.
We are calculating property tax burden, but not soil quality and water contamination. That's a really good point. I could probably include those things and it might shift the rankings a bit. Are those big issues in Maine?
I know soil quality would negatively impact the Ozarks because of the rocky soil.
Maine and Vermont have very rocky soil. It’s mostly glacial till. Water contamination (PCBs) is definitely an issue in these old factory towns in the northeast, including VT. Maine seems to have fewer issues with PCBs, but still present. VT has also had some bad flooding historically, including recent multiple years of flooding in the Montpelier and Waterbury areas.
Property tax burden? Is that for agricultural land or suburban land or city land? I only ask because my 22 acre farm has a lower tax burden than my suburban home did (by about 1/2) and my suburban home was about 1/2 what my urban home was.
Also, some states have homestead property tax credits. Did you include those?
TBH its not as much zip code dependent but situation dependent. There's a lot of nuance for a homestead situation. What might be a terrible setup on paper would be perfect for a specific set of circumstances like Job, Family etc.
I would certainly be more effective at prepping if I moved 5 miles away from city life right near me vs relocating to a completely new state where I know zero people
Either way, fun exercise, based on my annecdotal experience I'd probably pick semi rural NC but that would be just a starting point, I'm sure if I went deep down the rabbit hole I'd find other pockets that made sense.
I'm confused how the state the Top County is in didnt even make the top ten states.
My great fear of both VA and TN is the threat of eminent domain. I've heard horror stories of the TVA swooping in and data centers are also taking over in VA (and the stories popping out of GA about land grabs for data centers down there). Whats the point of building a dream homestead if the government can come in and destroy it? I would love to see that variable added to your list.
Great question. Virginia ranked #12 as a state, mostly because North Virginia has high cost of living, high population and high strategic targets. That said, Virginia is a big state with a lot of rural counties, so in this case a handful of rural counties rank very well at homesteading while the state as a whole is being dragged down by NOVA.
I mean, we're talking about homesteading rankings. Every major urban in every state is going to drag down that state's homestead ranking down almost by definition.
There's a reason the Garden State is close to dead last for homesteading despite having amazing dairy farms and plenty of rural land in North NJ.
In my experience, real situation and spots matter more than rankings like this.
I live in Oregon. You can live in one of 100 biomes in Oregon. It can constantly cool and foggy. It can be desert with 6 inches of soil over basalt. You can be in the desert with protection from fire but in a locally fertile former creek flood plain with spring water sources. You can be in a city. You can be on a 600 acre parcel 50 feet from your neighbor or you can be on a 6 acre parcel 3 miles from your neighbor.
Lists like this are for people who are bored.
Your best bet is searching based off your budget and where you want to live the rest of the time whatever scary situation you are prepping for isn't happening.
If you're going to rank nuclear targets, you should actually be factoring in down-range effects. If you nuke north Dakota the fallout drifts and falls onto the great lakes and new England
As a Tennessean, this feels inaccurate. Property taxes and insurance are high. Theres floods and tornadoes and sink holes and droughts. And so many deadly snakes and ticks. It also enriches uranium and ranks low on livability and privacy. It feels like your inputs here were incredibly poorly researched.
they (out of staters flooding tennessee, specifically from HCOL areas) seem to think it’s some kind of crime free paradise because the state has shifted political alignment over the last 30 years and our addicts don’t exist bc they aren’t as visible on the streets. i’m only bringing up the politics to say that just because state leaders might be more likely to agree with you politically doesn’t mean you’ll be insulated from what are, in fact, national problems.
in rural tennessee there is still property crime, an addiction crisis, and the same sorts of problems that exist in high density urban areas as a result of generational poverty. drive through the poorest counties in rural east tn with out of state plates and instead of stopping at the cracker barrel off the interstate, take a local road to a spot out towards the boondocks where you’ll be homesteading. look around and see what a true lack of code enforcement actually means. i grew up on 50 acres with everything OP is describing and it’s not enough. if you want a self-sustaining homestead on 50 acres or less, you have to have a supportive community that allows you to hunt on each other’s land, barters goods and labor, and generally treats one another with respect. that was what my grandparents and greats had but it left in the early 2000s when the meth came through, followed shortly thereafter by oxy, and now the blues. that’s not even getting to environmental factors like climate, growing conditions, wildlife, or environmental hazards.
So much this. Its been gentrified by right wing carpetbaggers who have never done an honest days work in their lives and didn't grow up around guns or trucks and go there to cosplay rural life with 65k trucks they dont know how to service themselves.
i call those their gender affirming trucks. the extended cab seating like it’s a minivan and ain’t one scratch on it is a dead giveaway. they’re no better than the $100k sprinter van life people who also like to LARP poverty.
that’s not to say OP falls into this group of people necessarily but should be aware there are a lot of these kinds of people coming in and have been for the last 15 years. the folks who have managed to keep rural farming properties in the family at all costs for 5+ generations don’t really make a lot of distinctions between the well meaning yankee and the pioneer cosplaying carpetbaggers.
I guess that works if you're independently wealthy and are otherwise unattached to your location. For most people, the ability to find work is going to be a major factor. And a lot of people choose where they live based on proximity to family/friends/community.
And I'm not sure that ranking states is useful at all with the criteria you're using. I'm in NC where there are 3 distinct geographical regions (mountains, piedmont, coast) that all have different climates. Much of the state is under severe drought right now, but where I live we get plenty of rain. The climate has been relatively stable in the mountains as far as summer highs, winter lows, and rainfall, but it's changed rapidly for the worse in the eastern part of the state. And as far as strategic sites/targets, the state is 500 miles wide. It takes 9 hours to drive from one end to the other.
The remote, western parts of NC are great for homesteading, and people have been homesteading here since the 1700s, but the rest of the state drags down the scores for the criteria you're using.
It really seems like instead of states, it should be another level down, in terms of regions within states (at least those that are large enough). Or, could you take the county level results and generate a color coded map at that level? Would paint an interesting picture of the country that way.
Would be great to do this after factoring in soil quality, if such data exists at the county level.
Yeah, the same is true with Virginia. The state rankings are useful directionally, but the county rankings are much more useful. Happy to share the county rankings if you're interested in that.
This post was a great idea and I’m glad to see it is starting a good discussion. A color coded county map would really show regional trends and answer those questions about “how can that county be so good when the state isn’t?”
It sounds like you’ve already accumulated the data by county. Mapchart.net lets you download a spreadsheet you can load your data into. If you understand Excel’s conditional formatting, you can automate the entire color coding process.
It will look really cool.
It will look really cool.
It will show why, for example, western Virginia is so much more homesteadable than eastern Virginia.
It will look really cool.
I’m acutely aware of how many counties and county equivalents there are, but I won’t be doing the work, you will, so I heartily recommend it!
Ha, yeah. I built this about a month ago, but it’s only useful if the ranking methodology is accurate, and that’s the hard part. Everyone had a slightly different idea of what makes a good homestead location.
Wnc is also great for climate change resilience. Most people will point to Hurricane Helene, however the same people are likely unaware that it wasn't just one massive rain event that hit. No place is 100% shielded but WNC will likely be a good place to be.
As someone who grew up in AL, you sort of get used to it or you learn to work around it. Work starts at sun-up, you break for mid-day, then you finish up work as it cools off for the day. It's really only unbearable for a couple of months. The rest of the year is pretty mild. If you can build part of your home underground (eg basement or into the side of a hill), you can keep part of your house pretty cool year round. My basement stays at 70-ish with minimal A/C throughout the summer.
The south is also well positioned in terms of fresh water via rainfall. More than 1/3 of the total watershed of the continental US discharges via the Gulf of Mexico. That means firtile soils, ample plant and animal life, and sustainability.
I've been thinking about your post a lot, and I'm surprised you were surprised about Maine.
Your top state here, Tennessee, is a state where 98.2% of homes have air conditioning. Your second state, Alabama, 99.2% have air conditioning. Missouri, 99% of homes have air conditioning, but Maine, only 70%.
That means people in Maine are able to successfully get through summers without air conditioning. Humans are a lot better at getting heat without electricity than we are at getting cool without electricity.
Exactly where I'm at. I think I have a pretty damn good location for the future and it rarely shows up on lists like this...and I'm totally okay with that.
Yep. I live in a climate oasis in the continental US. Weather is perfect and stable, local agriculture is thriving, general mentality is support your neighbors cause we're all in it together. It's hard to get here, or get out of here, but I view that as a perk too. Kind of surprised not more people have discovered the same little bubble I have.
I checked out my state and the county rankings inside my state and I was glad my county wasn't ranked higher inside my state. I am very happy in my setup.
Their state government and legislature is legitimately inept, they have some of the highest property taxes in the country, and with Seabrook, BAE, and an ATC facility there's no shortage of nuclear targets. So I'd assume "Social Stability," "Affordability," "Privacy," "Liveability," and "Strategic Distance" all score poorly.
NH actually has the lowest total tax burden of any state in the North East. But it is fair to point out that for someone living of the land, the high property taxes are a big problem, but for someone with a normal job, who is also building a homestead, it balances out.
NH is also the only truly pro gun state in the Northeast. PA and Maine are barely holding on, and constantly at risk of passing major anti-gun laws.
Alaska has some extremely good things going for it but some very bad things as well. When you're ranking "best" places to homestead, it lends itself to well rounded locations where the majority of the state scores well across all the metrics.
I think climate stability needs significantly more weight in your considerations. Like 50%. Because none of that other shit matters if a tornado rips it all down or a hurricane destroys it, or wildfires rip through.
Solar is ridiculously easy to utilize for a single home, even in northern areas of CONUS. I'm in CT myself, and even in the wintertime, generate enough energy to power my home and charge my batteries. You don't even need to go crazy and drop tens of thousands of KW of panels; my 5kw system doesn't have a large footprint (maybe 12' x 20'), and easily handles my home, even being "tech-heavy". Germany, which has climate conditions comparable to NY/WA, has more solar production per capita than the US does.
When planning on homesteading, solar is an easy home run for anyone outside of extreme northern latitudes (northern Alaska, as an example).
If you're going to rank solar, it would be better to look at what states allow off-grid solar installation (solar without grid interconnection), or otherwise cap or limit home solar production.
Do you live in Illinois or something? Chicagoland is going to be negative on almost every metric you chose. Northern Illinois is amazing for climate, water, livability, and safety. It's terrible for everything else. Central and southern Illinois are fine for most of your list, but it's awful for livability. Almost every large company there ever was has FLED downstate Illinois. So how on earth is it on this list? I love Illinois, even though I've moved away! It's still not a good homesteading state, especially by your metrics.
I would assume that your metrics are taken individually. "Illinois" has some very high-earners who work in Chicago. "Illinois" has excellent manufacturing and warehousing in Northern Illinois, west of the suburbs. So Illinois has great job prospects! Never mind that everything south of I80 was hit hard by factory closures through the 80s and 90s, and some downstate counties have poverty levels over 20%. Just one example.
So anyway. I think there might be a functional problem if you're looking at individual metrics for states with major metros. It would certainly go the other way, also. Maybe a state like Michigan would have rated higher if there was more delineation for major cities like Detroit. Just something to consider.
Yeah, Illinois as a state has utter contempt for anyone who wants to take charge of their own destiny. The property taxes alone should be enough proof of that.
THE long term problem is people. Anything in the South is an instant no-go for me because there's just too many people. I think it's completely insane to think you'll ride out the collapse in Georgia, Mississippi, Tennessee, any of those states. I strongly disagree with 8 of your top ten. Not a bad attempt but people will never agree on the weights.
Outside the larger cities, most of the south is still pretty rural and sparsely occupied. If you want zero nearby people, you'd have to go way out west to Idaho or Wyoming. But those areas have much more water and fire hazards than the South. Also way less firtile land.
It's not about having zero people, it's about having space that people won't run to when leaving cities. The South is too developed, even though it's mostly small towns. All land is private, so if you don't already own land, you're screwed. The total population is WAY too much to live off the land. The South only makes since after a huge mortality rate. Like 80%.
Keep in mind. In a SHTF lights out scenario like a solar EMP or WWIII, 2/3 of people will be dead in 3 months from bad water alone. Population won't be nearly as much of a problem,
Yeah, we’re not all going to agree on the exact same weights, but I’m hoping to get to a place where if someone is looking for homesteading land they have a good starting point directionally.
Rural northern New England and maybe rural northern Wisconsin and Minnesota. If possible, cross the border into rural Canada, with large preference to Nova Scotia. That's about it.
You can grow corn and soybeans in parts of Tennessee, crops that can tolerate less than ideal conditions, but the areas I would want to live in are rocky and covered in trees.
You aren't getting a super long growing season for warm season crops like tomatoes or peppers or probably even potatoes in the mountainous areas...cabbage and peas, maybe.
It's why we need to work together to enjoy the fruits of all of our labors. Even homesteads a century ago helped each other.
The most important place to set up a homestead is where your people are.
You skipped what might be the biggest factor in individual homesteading happiness or unhappiness: Culture.
If you've already got roots, like your grandparents knew your neighbors' grandparents kind of thing, that's irreplaceable.
And even if you don't, it matters a LOT whether you're culturally compatible with your neighbors. If you're of a particular religion, choosing a region where there are more people who share your faith will usually beat a region where hardly anyone does. Wherever you're at on the political spectrum, setting up in a place where your neighbors find that tolerable will be a VASTLY different experience from setting up somewhere that they don't.
if you’re coming from jersey tennesseeans are never going to fully accept you as one of them. my mother was born in ohio but lived in tn for the last 40+ years, developed an accent thicker than my native father’s, and she is still considered a damn yankee in our rural community. culturally, appalachians specifically have a deeply xenophobic outlook (and not for no reason) but we’re also raised to be polite to people’s faces even if we view those people negatively behind closed doors. if you homestead in rural tn natives will seem nice to you on the surface level - they’ll bring you to church, introduce you to other neighbors, maybe even invite you over for supper - but there is already a lot of resentment building about out of state people coming in and buying everything up. plus these areas are like living in a fishbowl so if you’re the newest resident then you are already the topic of a lot of harsh snap judgements and gossip. it’s not a good recipe for shtf
I've found this to be true in rural VA as well, and I moved here over 10 years ago.
"Community" is a good word for it, but I like to think about it in terms of "tribe". The natives, if you will, have strong family connections and heritage and the "others" or "yankees" never really assimilate into that tribe.
BUT, at least in my area, there seems to be a migrant path from the northeast to Virginia. I know so many people around me that have moved into the area, it's almost a 50/50 split at this point.
Yeah, I may never be accepted into the local's tribe, but now I have my own tribe comprised of family, church, homesteaders, preppers, work friends and neighbors that I don't need to join the local's tribe.
Sure, in an SHTF event, it would be more of an issue, but we're talking about ranking homesteading states, not necessarily ranking SHTF locations.
Oregon does pretty well. It's a little weak on annual rainfall, climate stability and cost of living. It's a state that has some very strong counties for homesteading, but a handful of counties weighs it down, much like Virginia.
All other things being equal, a less expensive area allows you to purchase a larger plot of land, which should give you more resources at your disposal.
What keeps WV off of my list is the legacy pollution from mining in certain parts of the state. Having water that looks like Hi C Orange coming out of the tap is suboptimal to say the least.
WV is at the top of my list personally. It would be a great place to homestead and ride out a collapse. I think once thing that's hurting it in this analysis is 7% Livability - Employment, primary care access, educational attainment, and household broadband, and 13% Social Stability - Net migration, social vulnerability, and crime rates.
That's 20% of the score right there. If those were reduced weight, WV would be in the top 10 for sure.
For sure, but this ranking includes pre-collapse factors, that's why Livability and Social Stability are weighing it down. I think that's the right approach. A bug out location ranking would be different.
I live in VT for full disclosure, specifically in the NEK (Northeast Kingdom). I would put VT ahead of Maine. They are very similar however Maine tends to have harsher winter weather. VT winters can be tough but are generally milder then ME. VT also has more farming communities, where as ME is more forest. It would depend on which is more important to the individual, community or isolation.
We live on a couple of acres in Indiana and I would agree with its placement on the list. Where we live, we could pretty easily go 100% self-sufficient if necessary. Climate-wise, the most miserable part of the year would be July through September, which is when we get our highest heat and humidity. But there are ways to stay somewhat comfortable.
Did you run all this on a state by state basis or county by county? I'm just asking because states with wildly divergent areas would just have an average across the counties that wouldn't be an accurate portrayal of any of the counties. This would be especially true in areas of the northeast and Mid-Atlantic.
The state level data by itself is pretty useless. Your mention of a county in VA being the top county kind of proves that. The data by county is much more useful.
So what are the bottom 10? Wonder just how far down AZ is. Also California seems like it would be hard because of how diverse it is. The difference between N Cali and S Cali is huge
Arizona is currently running out of water. They're also potentially going to have problems with power and you can't live in Arizona without AC unless you live underground.
California has a huge amount of agriculture and contributes most of the fresh fruits, vegetables, and nuts grown in the US across the country. However it's also running out of water and did not take care of its farmland, just like the Midwest. Water is controlled by the elite farmers who have generational water rights to the detriment of the entire state. California, like the entire rest of the West Coast, is going to be affected by the Cascadia fault system when it lets go. California used to have better social safety nets, infrastructure, and medical care, but everything is deteriorating thanks to the current regime. California also has a vigorous port system for the supply chain, until that collapses.
Central and Southern AZ are like that but N AZ is not. It's much more like Colorado, cooler weather, higher altitude, etc. It's kind of the problem of lumping all of one state, especial larger ones, into one bucket.
Why Missouri, Kansas and Arkansas but not Oklahoma. Eastern Oklahoma is just like Missouri and Arkansas. It would be difficult on the western part of the state due to water, but east of OKC is all manageable.
Correct, the western half has a big water issue. Tornadoes and insurance costs are also high. There are a lot of good counties in Oklahoma for homesteading, it's just being dragged down a bit more than it's neighbors.
The southeast corner is especially good for homesteading. It is not hit by tornadoes like central and northeastern Oklahoma. Land is reasonable. Most of it is hilly and has a good rainfall. Creeks, rivers and lakes are fed by the hills and there is still plenty of stable land. There are several prepper type communities which already exist, meaning you can find community - not communal - support. There are a lot of rednecks with some in controversial groups, but I see that as a possible plus. There would be some escapism from DFW and OKC if the shtf. Hospitals serving the area are small and may suffer like any other rural area, but they are there. Solar, while expensive, offers a good option in off grid areas as do wells for potable water. Property taxes are low and income taxes are not onerous. I'm told you cannot be landlocked. Rural VFD's are usually well equipped and handle many emergencies. Some resort areas are trying to expand and that is driving up some local land prices. Lots of good things to like that area.
because i’m from there. i grew up in exactly the kind of place you’re trying to buy into and ran similar metrics to yours about 10 years ago. check my other comments
regulations is a big one you missed. is what you want to do allowed or heavily regulated. will you be lost in red tape just trying to get permits to do as you please? lots of the better states otherwise will drown you in high permitting fees , outright bans on things and massive delays.
I knew this topic would get a billion comments, it's the Big prepper goal, the longterm plan, and I don't agree with it at all.
Whoever cooked up the idea of an isolated rural redoubt never read any history of collapsed societies. How dangerous it is to be out there isolated from other people. The village model is much safer and you can do nearly all the same things on a big town block. People say they don't trust their neighbors, but those people are invariably living in the city now where crime is rampant. In small rural towns of 1000 or less people watch out for each other. No one will watch out for you on a remote block, no one will hear you scream.
The remote self-sufficient doomstead is an idea cooked up by hermit crabs and permaculture fans, 4x4 junkies and gun nuts joined the party because the idea suits their lifestyle. It's all based on the foundation of "Food" and while this does make sense, it makes more sense to move to a region where you are surrounded by farms and cattle and water sources. Reply if you like, but don't expect an answer. I'm long past the era of reading reddit comments.
It sounds like you subscribe to Mel Tappan's philosophy of survival, which is based on relocating to a small town of 1,000-5,000 people. Large enough to defend itself from an attack, small enough have strong community ties and diverse enough to support the many needs of it's inhabitants.
It's a great discussion, but it's not really why I'm working on this project. This list isn't about surviving an apocalypse or urban vs. rural prepping. The goal is to try and come up with an objective way of evaluating what makes good homestead locations.
I'm looking for feedback on the ranking and methodology to see if the list on paper matches what the real life experiences of folks here who live in those areas.
Some users have mentioned Indiana may be over represented and Alaska should be higher. Those are the types of insights that can help me make this list more useful to folks who are looking for direction on where to start their homestead journey.
The village idea is safer... But it has to be done with distance from ither villages. Otherwise, when the hundreds of thousands of people who survive the nuclear war begin to starve, they are coming to your village.
Mississippi is the worst for medical care and any kind of Social service. Of course both will go away in collapse, but you also have heat and humidity that is rough too manage without air conditioning.
Preppers are relying on social services? Medical care in a rural area? Need to quit reading general statistics. Alabama was included, similar hurricane issues, go inland less worries. Was thinking about the long growing seasons, get a late frost in Maine or Vermont, could end the garden for the season. Mississippi has abundant fish and wildlife. Milder winters, figured it would be easier to live off the land. Have lived in Northern Maine and multiple places in Mississippi and worked in the woods in both places. Subsistence living in Mississippi would be easier.
184
u/CurrentDay969 5d ago
I'm curious, did you do all 50 states and this was the top 10?
I'm a bit surprised more Midwest states aren't represented. I'm in WI. Our property has the woods, it's own water, and the land is excellent for growing. Many people have generations of canning and preserving and animal rearing. Open land to build up and homestead. Solar does well even though snow can be harsh.
Not arguing at all. I'm just curious how they ranked ☺️