Zombie Walk 2010

I am one for putting in some thinking ahead of going on vacation, so as I hear about TV shows and movies about the zombie apocalypse it occurred to me that some places would be safer than others to be when the local graveyards start spewing forth the undead.

San Francisco

San Francisco may seem like an odd location choice because it has the second highest population density in the United States after Manhattan. But one quirky thing about the City by the Bay is that in a move that showed great foresight between 1900 and 1940 San Francisco moved almost all its cemeteries and their residents out of the city limits further south to the city of Colma… which may therefore be one of the worst places to find yourself in a zombie outbreak.

Louisville, Kentucky

Generally I think the idea of staying in a city is probably a bad idea, but Louisville, Kentucky, would be one place I would consider as it is the home of the  Louisville Slugger baseball bat. While residents of England and the makers of Sean of the Dead would argue for a cricket bat as the definitive protection against zombies, those of us in the U.S. know that a good piece of maple is the way to preserve the American way.

So if you are in the Louisville area when the excrement hits the rotating cooling device, then you might look for me in the Louisville Slugger Museum which I am going to assume has some of the best bats ever made.


Greenland has only 0.02 people per square kilometer which makes it the sparsest population of any country. When ex-people start to want to eat your brains I suggest hightailing it to someplace like Greenland which just has a lot less people. Granted much of Greenland is covered by large sheets of ice so I can see that there might be some disadvantages to living in frozen tundra when the world as a whole has to go back to subsistance farming and living off old Twinkies. Greenland is probably a better option for those who love fish as the fishing, and especially the shrimping, should still be a viable food source. There certainly should be some ice for an ice box after the power grids fall apart.

Falkland Islands

The Falkland Islands has only 0.25 people per square kilometer making it over-all only slightly more densely populated than Greenland but without all the ice sheets. The Falklands also has a large population of sheep for making sweaters so I would start learning how to spin your own wool. Being over 300 miles away from the South American mainland should give some protection and with the British presence on the island we should be able to find a cricket bat or two.

Tristan da Cunha

If 300 miles from flesh-eaters does not seem like enough distance for you than how about Tristan da Cunha which is a British protectorate in the South Atlantic that is 1,750 miles from the nearest landmass. There is even an island called Inaccessible Island which sounds like a good alternative. It has enough wildlife that it has been declared a World Heritage Site by UNESCO. The island has no airport and can only be reached by ship. I will readily admit that this will make your getaway a bit awkward, but it should also provide some protection from a global pandemic.


If you have to find yourself fighting for your very existence no longer at the top of the food chain, consider that not all people are created equal. Consider Bolivia which has some of the shortest people on the planet. With the average man only 5 foot 6 inches (1.6 m), it might be a better place to find yourself than say the Netherlands where the men are on average 6 1/2 inches taller at 6 feet 1/2 inches (1.838 m). Give you and your unlikely descendants a fighting chance.

Great Falls, Montana

For an unexpected choice consider Great Falls, Montana, for your refuge. First, Montana has the 3rd highest ownership of guns of any state in the U.S. (behind only Alaska and Wyoming) so one can assume that there will be stockpiles of ammunition as well. But better yet, news stories recently showed that residents of Great Falls, in particular, are keeping an eye on this zombie menace.

“Pranksters” took over the audio for a local TV station to put out a “fake” emergency broadcast message about the Zombie apocalypse  The message warned zombies were “attacking the living” and warned people not to “approach or apprehend these bodies as they are extremely dangerous,” according to the Associated Press. Prank or just really prepared?


Lastly, consider the interior of the Australian outback with its wide sweeping vistas and barren landscape. If the Mad Max films have taught us anything, it is that Australia will fair above average in a post-apocalyptic world… and you can still drive your car.

Chris Christensen blogs and podcasts about travel at Amateur Traveler

4 Comments On "8 Places to Travel in case of a Zombie Apocalypse"
  1. Christian Johnatty|

    I don’t think any cities should be on that list at all. Best place to hold off against zombies would be on a mountain/hilly area. Have the high ground against them.
    The Himalayas might be a good place, lots of greenery, won’t starve..would be cold too, keep them frozen since they’re cold blooded.

    Also I don’t think I’d like to meet up a Zombaroo in Australia.

    Lot of research put into this though, gj (thumbs up)

    1. Justin|

      I had a laugh at the Zombaroo, mate! Hahaha! :D

  2. bfwebster|

    Have to be careful what you choose, though. I have a great-uncle (on my mother’s side) in Canada who back in 1981 was tired of the rat race (in Canada, no less!) and wanted to move to somewhere very remote and peaceful.

    So he moved to the Falkland islands. Less than a year later, of course, the Falklands War broke out.

  3. sucrelifebolivia|

    Given that I’m 5″1′ Bolivia may have to be my getaway option in case of a Zombie Apocalypse lol! I lived in Sucre, Bolivia for 5 months, and during that time didn’t have to crane my neck once to talk to people, was quite great really! :)

Leave a Reply

Required fields are marked *

Recent posts