Survivor communities outside the known world

[Rabbit]

Personally I will be very disappointed if there isn't a surviving population on Tashirojima, Japan. 

[Thorin Schmidt]

Warmish, high density, open areas (like most of America) makes a poor situation for those few survivors of the Rash.

I would beg to differ on a couple points. the American Midwest is, admittedly, very warm in the summer.  It is also BITTERLY cold in the winter.  There are no mountains to shelter behind, and in fact, the Rockies to the West actually funnel Arctic air as far down as Oklahoma. So, the two Dakotas, and possibly Nebraska, would fare pretty well.  Also, I think you are still thinking too small when saying "open areas".  I'm not talking clearings.  I'm talking miles and miles of NO trees, NO hills, NO covenient places to hide from the sun.  Trolls and Giants would find it almost impossible to navigate the Plains in summer.  So, going out to the fields to work?  Easy-peasy, when the nearest SINGLE TREE is a mile away... the only danger would be going out at night, which, would be admittedly dangerous, but not insurmountably so, given a defensible structure.

Of course, there would still be the danger of Beasts, but, if big cats are immune, then our mountain lions, lynxes, bobcats, and cougars should help in that regard...

[TomCat]

Being isolated from the rest of civilisation would be not enough - even in the Appalachian Mountains or in the Midwest there are a lot of mammals, and most of them would turn into infectious beasts.
A much better chance of survival would be in places like Kodiak Island or Graham Island (inhabited by only a few people, but maybe enough to survive for 3 generations / cold enough for safety / warm enough for some agriculture / some military or coast guard installations there).
Edit and P.S.: Germany might survive on Helgoland - but that should be known to the 5 Nations, right?

[Thorin Schmidt]

even in the Appalachian Mountains or in the Midwest there are a lot of mammals, and most of them would turn into infectious beasts.

well, true, the thing is though, didn't most of the mammals die as well?  I seem to recall from the prologue that most animals died, some became beasts, and a few survived, with the exception of cats, who are totally immune...

[Fimbulvarg]

well, true, the thing is though, didn't most of the mammals die as well?  I seem to recall from the prologue that most animals died, some became beasts, and a few survived, with the exception of cats, who are totally immune...

That's hard to say, the first victims of the rash were reported as being dead at some point, and there's also the picture of a dead dog. Whether or not being dead means that the organism will not become a beast/troll is an open question considering the decayed state of the monsters we have seen so far.

[Mayabird]

Here are circumstances that make immediate survival more likely.
-> Cold
-> Low Population density
-> Defensible locations

A few of the more rural cantons of Switzerland may qualify, come to think of it, and Switzerland is basically designed to be able to hold off  invasions (the bridges are all built so they can be easily demolished, tunnels so they can be collapsed, things like that).  All the men are required to be in the military and get training during their lives and they all are required to keep rifles in their homes, just in case. 

[BrainBlow]

That's hard to say, the first victims of the rash were reported as being dead at some point, and there's also the picture of a dead dog. Whether or not being dead means that the organism will not become a beast/troll is an open question considering the decayed state of the monsters we have seen so far.

There's also the matter of how there probably is something of an immune animal population as well.
The surviving animals that have been mentioned twice in the story now are probably immune specimens, and for their species to survive for 90 years I'm assuming they're in a better conditions than we might think, and may be growing up their ranks with more immune every year. How they behave in regard to their infected beast counterparts would be an interesting subject as well.
I fear for the whales, though.
Unlike humanity, the collapse of civilization was probably of little matter to grazing animals, meaning they did not have their immune individuals die in famine or to common diseases like with the humans.

It's an interesting point I hope the story will explore a bit more.

[Fimbulvarg]

This information from Minna herself is quite interesting:

There's actually a few in-story reasons!
1: WAY too high overall population density (which is also why the southern parts of the Nordic countries are empty) which is VERY bad for reasons to be revealed.
2. Too far south and therefore not cold enough winters. Also very bad for reasons to be revealed.
3. Not strong enough natural defenses. For example all the Finnish settlements that exist are located on islands surrounded by labyrinths of lakes and the Norwegian ones in fjords shielded by the sea and high mountains. Very good for reasons to be revealed!

And small surviving populations on those little Scottish islands and stuff have moved to the larger/safer Nordic settlements decades ago.

The three ponts have been considered in this thread so far, but the part about there being Scottish immigrants in the Nordic countries seems like news.

[BrainBlow]

This information from Minna herself is quite interesting:

The three ponts have been considered in this thread so far, but the part about there being Scottish immigrants in the Nordic countries seems like news.

That looks like it is a reply. What's the context of what she's replying to? Is she dismissing the possibility of people surviving in some areas?
And with that information:


This picture is probably important for anyone imagining a surviving Japan where the infection was not completely blocked out.
Keeping in mind that this is just one winter picture. Judging by mainland Eurasia there, it was probably a mild winter. (but I seriously can't find any other winter photos, although there's a ton of Scandinavia)

[ruth]

brainblow, that map actually doesn't look too far off!

here are some good maps with the snowiest regions and (importantly!) the towns that are in the mountains, most likely to be able to tough it out after the rash!

[Hrollo]

Has Mongolia been mentionned as a possible place of survival?

It has quite a low population density (this is a country almost thrice as big as Texas… with about 11% of the population of Texas), very cold climate, with average annual temperatures at the freezing point (in the winter, the average gets to -20°C (-4°F), with nightly temperatures of -40°C/F (it's cool when it coincides in both units) being pretty normal occurences — it's worth noting than the capital, Ulan Bator, in spite of being much farther from the North Pole than Reykjavik or Nuuk, still holds the title of coldest capital in the world). There are several important mountain ranges in the western half of the country, but in fact the whole country lies at a pretty high altitude (average 1500 meters). Oh, and there are on average 257 cloudless days a year.

And of course the people there are used to survival in extreme conditions (because if the cold weather wasn't enough, the country is also very dry and the weather tends to be quite unpredictable on the short run), has quite a lot of herders, and the population are used to live with virtually no crop, relying almost entirely on animal products (the country has less than 1% of arable land).

[Fimbulvarg]

That looks like it is a reply. What's the context of what she's replying to? Is she dismissing the possibility of people surviving in some areas?

The context is a discussion about page 66, the world map. She's replying to this comment:

What I want to know is why the British Isles aren't on there. Unless it experienced a total population loss, I'd think that small coastal quarantined communities in Scotland or England would be a lot easier to find than small communities in the interior of Finland. I know I know there's that whole "not Scandinavian" thing, but geographically and demographically speaking, it's a bit hard to justify it not being there.

Has Mongolia been mentionned as a possible place of survival?

It has quite a low population density (this is a country almost thrice as big as Texas… with about 11% of the population of Texas), very cold climate, with average annual temperatures at the freezing point (in the winter, the average gets to -20°C (-4°F), with nightly temperatures of -40°C/F (it's cool when it coincides in both units) being pretty normal occurences — it's worth noting than the capital, Ulan Bator, in spite of being much farther from the North Pole than Reykjavik or Nuuk, still holds the title of coldest capital in the world). There are several important mountain ranges in the western half of the country, but in fact the whole country lies at a pretty high altitude (average 1500 meters). Oh, and there are on average 257 cloudless days a year.

And of course the people there are used to survival in extreme conditions (because if the cold weather wasn't enough, the country is also very dry and the weather tends to be quite unpredictable on the short run), has quite a lot of herders, and the population are used to live with virtually no crop, relying almost entirely on animal products (the country has less than 1% of arable land).

There could be some nomadic communities holding out in the middle of nowhere. Mongolia would be at high risk once people start fleeing the northern Chinese metropols en masse. As you say they will have to rely heavily on livestock, which suggests that only existing farmer communities would survive through the first winters.

[Hrollo]

There could be some nomadic communities holding out in the middle of nowhere. Mongolia would be at high risk once people start fleeing the northern Chinese metropols en masse. As you say they will have to rely heavily on livestock, which suggests that only existing farmer communities would survive through the first winters.

Ah yeah, that could be a problem; although if I'm to believe this map (warning for big image), there appear to be quite a healthy buffer zone of low population density between the Mongolian-Chinese border and the actual zones of heavy chinese presence. It's worth noting than the Gobi desert is in the way, so even if the Chinese departed en masse in that direction, it's not clear that many of them could actually make it through 800+ km of desert to the "safe" areas of Mongolia, especially during the winter months where the mean average is around -27°C/-16°F.

In general, I'm not sure the refugees are that much of a problem in most parts of the world: the disease seems to spread so unexpectedly fast that most people end up trapped where they are by the time they realise there's a problem bad enough that you need to actually leave (as opposed to just staying a few days/weeks locked in your house), and appart from a few crazy survivalists, most of the survivors were people who were trapped in the right place at the right time.

I assume this would be compounded in China, where the government generally tries to prevent the spread of any information that could lead to negative public response.

[BrainBlow]

I think one of the problems with Mongolia would be the fact that Mongolia as a nation has modernized a lot with major metropolitan cities and airports just like anywhere else in the world., and the nomads are becoming fewer and fewer.
And a lot of those living out in the sticks are often quite poor.

[Thorin Schmidt]

Someone mentioned Switzerland, another interior that might be good is some parts of Kazakhstan.  Here is the data for UST-KAMENOGORSK:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-IVy_B1DDaKRm9wcVRBVl93RnM/edit?usp=sharing

sorry, i'm having trouble making inline images. 

If anyone cares to end my frustrations with a quiet pm in the right direction, I'd be grateful.