Take A Look at the Largest Bunker Community on Earth

nuclear_weapons_testSome people spend their disposable income on timeshares in the Bahamas or condos in Vail. Vivos Group, a California based prepping company, is appealing to an entirely different demographic: preppers. The company has started a survival shelter community in South Dakota. More specifically, they have repurposed over 500 old military bunkers for prepper purposes. While others perish in a nuclear war, Vivos hopes residents will be safe in their remote, military-grade bunkers.

With potential for over 5,000 residents, the community is incredibly ambitious. Moreover, Vivos, among other amenities, plans to include school bunkers. It truly seems as though Vivos seems to be planning for the extended future. While their plans are certainly impressive, it remains to be seen how feasible such a survival community is. Would you consider living in a bunker community in an SHTF Scenario?

Support SurvivalCache.com by shopping @ Amazon (Click Here)

Visit Sponsors of SurvivalCache.com












5 comments… add one
  • Sara Williams January 6, 2017, 11:21 am

    Looks like a good idea

  • Penknife January 6, 2017, 3:24 pm

    Just went through their full website. Interesting, but creepy. Someone or some board of directors is social engineering the bunker society. It might make more sense to have prospective bunker owners interview the directors of the project to see if the fit is good. Accepting every wingnut with an MD might sound like a plan, but I’d give it six months before it goes all Woodbury.

  • Vivisky January 6, 2017, 3:49 pm

    Well, there’s quite a few considerations, I took a look at their website and they have more locations than just South Dakota….if you have lots of money and live within a short drive, it might be worth it. But the cost to simply rent a shell of a bunker is $25k, plus you have to do all the updates to the air filtration, solar, electrical, etc not to mention building the rooms inside bunker. They say there are deep Artesian wells on the property but do not say how much they’re gonna charge you to use that well water. There is also a (currently) $1,000/year land rent. You have to put all the food you want to eat into your bunker in advance. If you want to grow food that is all your expense, no community hydroponics exist. There are probably many “hidden” rules that would bother a lot of people; one of their other locations has a very restrictive pet policy, along with a per-person charge which is going to increase to $50k….what sort of price increases and restrictive policies will be in place at the South Dakota location? The total cost to get yourself set up there, seems to me higher than it would cost to do so on land you might already own. The biggest problem is, it would be impossible to get there in event of a nuclear or biological attack, so for most people, probably would be better off building a bunker on their own land.

  • South Dakota January 10, 2017, 5:26 pm

    My father worked at this installation known as “IGLOO” in the 50s and 60s. He would caution his family never to go near it as he had seen them storing some very ugly chemical weapons onsite. I believe they even openly admit to having and working with Serin gas here.

  • Roger January 15, 2017, 4:45 pm

    One very important thing to consider is who’s in charge when the bomb drops? Did your bunker just become your prison! Once inside and locked up from the outside world, can the security team become your jailers; what choice would you have but to do as you’re told? Also, bunkers are not perfect, perhaps their most vulnerable point is the need to get air from outside on a regular basis. Though doubtlessly in the event of a nuclear war, the bunker would be sealed off from the surface (assuming it’s totally underground), this could only last for a short time before the need to replenish oxygen and eliminate carbon dioxide for both man and machine would be paramount! Yes, plants do this but they require a lot of room, soil (or chemical substitute), a lot of water, and of course sunlight, natural or man-made; the first being quite difficult when based underground and the second requiring electricity and ‘grow’ lamps that would need generators, which require fuel and oxygen, etc. Thus, an attacking force would only need to block your air inlets and/or outlets to force you to surrender or suffocate. The only other option that I know of would be the one that nuclear submarines use; that using the abundant electricity produced by their on-board nuclear reactor which breaks down the water surrounding their vessel into oxygen and hydrogen and uses other systems to eliminate carbon dioxide build-up! Not a simple (or cheap) solution with it’s own set of dangers! Personally, I think a bunker that is half-way buried in a simple form such as a sphere or a double-cone (base-to-base) or a square pyramid (base-to-base) would be a much better design, certainly easier to defend! Besides, I don’t have $25K + to blow! GLAHP!


Leave a Comment