After Temporary Frogro Closure, Students Confused That “Visible Physical Evidence of Rodents” Now Considered a Problem

Can someone explain this please? At the end of August, Fresh Grocer was shut down temporarily due to “visible physical evidence of rodent activity.” This left many students perplexed. Since when has visible physical evidence of rodents been considered a problem?

We spoke with several students at the university to get their take. Nicole Hampberg (W ‘21) said, “I was under the impression that visible physical evidence of rodents was a prerequisite for most buildings on Penn’s campus. I always feel safer where the rodents are — I figure, if a space is comfortable enough for rodents to live in, I’ll certainly be comfortable there.”

Connor Milton (N ‘23) had a similar take. “Before I came to Penn, I didn’t have a ton of experience with rodents. But after moving into the quad and studying in the basement of Van Pelt, I quickly became very familiar with them. At first I thought that the visible physical evidence of rodents was something that should be reported, but then I realized that was silly. It’s like, would you report it if your air conditioning was working too well? Obviously not, and it’s the same thing.”

Luckily, Fresh Grocer reopened quickly, probably because the reason for its closure was unintelligible in the first place.