Galveston officials urge visitors to stop feeding raccoons along Seawall after seven reported bites 71%

By Julianna Washburn44% Galveston County Bureau44%

8/7/2026, 1:06:14 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 20 faulty reasoning types, including Pessimism Bias, Slippery Slope, and Availability Heuristic, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 32% saturation with 111 hits. Analysis detected 856 faulty-reasoning hits from 347 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 54.8% and a BS Rank of 71% (9,123 of 30,584 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 70.20% of the article peer group.

Raccoons on the east end of Galveston Island have increasingly become a tourist attraction for visitors who come bearing handfuls of cheeseballs or Oreos for the mammals to snack on. 
However, City of Galveston Animal Services Unit Supervisor Josh Henderson said it's gotten out of hand. 
Henderson said the increase in people feeding raccoons has serious consequences as the mammals lose a natural fear of humans, making them more likely to scratch or bite. 
In fact, Henderson said seven raccoon bites have been reported in the past two weeks, posing a rabies risk. 
"I have my favorite restaurants and my favorite buffets, and I will pull up a chair, and I will eat until I go into a food coma and run away," Henderson said. 
"But raccoons should not be pulling up a chair at a buffet at the end of the Seawall [Boulevard]." 
On a recent visit to the east end of Seawall Boulevard, Henderson spotted 21 raccoons congregating near the main road because they've learned it's more profitable to get handouts from visitors than using their natural resources in the area. 
He said signage was put up in the area, warning people against feeding the raccoons, but it has been readily ignored. 
"What has happened in the last year is the signs are ignored like a Texas speed limit highway sign," Henderson said. 
Henderson said it's not just the risk of rabies that's concerning, but raccoons can carry salmonella bacteria on their paws. 
"How many of these folks are going out there and feeding them by their hand, playing patty cake with raccoons?" 
Henderson said. 
While it is not a violation of city laws to feed the raccoons, Henderson is hoping that can change soon. 
"I think we need to upgrade our signage to include a fine amount, enforceable by a citation, because right now, failing to follow our advice, maybe you get bit, maybe you don’t get bit. 
If you get bit, you’re looking at costly rabies treatment," Henderson said. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 1.6%Houston Public Media: 1.4%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 6.1%Julianna Washburn: 1.4%Houston Public Media: 0.9%Anchoring Bias6.1%This article: 19.9%Julianna Washburn: 2.7%Houston Public Media: 2.3%Availability Heuristic19.9%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.5%Houston Public Media: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.4%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.5%Houston Public Media: 0.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 2.6%Houston Public Media: 3.5%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 3.5%Julianna Washburn: 2.9%Houston Public Media: 0.7%Loss Aversion3.5%This article: 5.8%Julianna Washburn: 0.7%Houston Public Media: 0.5%Status Quo Bias5.8%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 5.8%Julianna Washburn: 2.6%Houston Public Media: 2.0%Optimism Bias5.8%This article: 28.5%Julianna Washburn: 2.7%Houston Public Media: 1.0%Pessimism Bias28.5%This article: 15.9%Julianna Washburn: 2.0%Houston Public Media: 3.9%Negativity Bias15.9%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.8%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 11.2%Julianna Washburn: 0.6%Houston Public Media: 0.4%Fundamental Attribution Error11.2%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 1.1%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.3%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 1.5%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.5%Julianna Washburn: 1.3%Houston Public Media: 1.1%Recency Bias5.5%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.2%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 5.5%Julianna Washburn: 0.3%Houston Public Media: 0.0%Straw Man5.5%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.5%Houston Public Media: 2.4%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 9.8%Julianna Washburn: 1.8%Houston Public Media: 0.8%False Dilemma9.8%This article: 21.0%Julianna Washburn: 1.9%Houston Public Media: 0.3%Slippery Slope21.0%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.0%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.1%Julianna Washburn: 1.8%Houston Public Media: 1.7%Hasty Generalization6.1%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 12.7%Julianna Washburn: 2.5%Houston Public Media: 3.6%Appeal to Emotion12.7%This article: 5.8%Julianna Washburn: 0.7%Houston Public Media: 0.6%Begging the Question5.8%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.9%Houston Public Media: 1.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 9.8%Julianna Washburn: 0.6%Houston Public Media: 0.3%Burden of Proof9.8%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 11.5%Julianna Washburn: 1.0%Houston Public Media: 1.2%Anecdotal11.5%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.1%Houston Public Media: 0.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.4%Houston Public Media: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 11.2%Julianna Washburn: 0.8%Houston Public Media: 0.8%Unattributed Quote11.2%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.4%Houston Public Media: 0.6%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 32.0%Julianna Washburn: 2.2%Houston Public Media: 1.1%Biased Writer Voice32.0%This article: 19.3%Julianna Washburn: 6.5%Houston Public Media: 1.1%Indoctrination19.3%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Julianna Washburn: 0.8%Houston Public Media: 0.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

347 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker87%attributed speech44writer words
Selected voice

Josh Henderson

94%flagged-word coverage
303 attributed words100% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%35.0%70.0%Biased Writer Voice-41.4 ptsWriter: 68.2%Josh Henderson: 26.7%26.7%Indoctrination-14.3 ptsWriter: 31.8%Josh Henderson: 17.5%17.5%Unattributed Quote+12.9 ptsWriter: 0.0%Josh Henderson: 12.9%12.9%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.