How we write our articles

Who writes these articles?

We do — Dom and Evika. We walk, mind and home-board dogs in Wassenaar. Every article on this site carries our names because we are answerable for what's in it: the choice of topic, the angle, the examples from our own week and the final version.

We didn't grow up in the Netherlands and we work in English every day. That's why every article exists in both Dutch and English: a lot of the owners around us are expats with the same questions and no Dutch-language answer they can read.

Do you use AI?

Yes, and we'd rather tell you than have you work it out. We use AI to help with the research and the first draft: finding sources, working out a structure, keeping the Dutch and English versions in step.

What AI does not do is invent what we have lived through. Every personal example in an article comes from a fixed list of real situations we wrote down ourselves. If there's no fitting example, we don't write that article.

AI also doesn't decide what gets published. Every article has to pass a fixed set of checks before it goes live, and articles that fail them don't get published. Skipping a day beats putting out a weak piece.

Which sources do we use?

Every article rests on at least four sources, and at least one of those always comes from a veterinary body, a university, a peer-reviewed journal or a government source. Those sources are listed by name at the bottom of the article so you can read them yourself.

Sources we deliberately don't use: forums, sites that were themselves written by AI, and companies selling the thing the article is about. A food manufacturer is not a neutral source on food.

If we use a number — a price, a percentage, an age limit — it comes with a source. If we can't back a number up, we cut it.

Health: what we do and don't do

We are dog carers, not vets and not certified behaviourists. That has concrete consequences for what you'll find here.

Articles on health, nutrition, medication or first aid rest on at least two veterinary or academic sources. They tell you when to call the vet. They never give doses, never a diagnosis and never a treatment plan — that belongs with your own vet, who can actually see your dog.

Behaviour articles are reward-based. We don't write about prong collars, shock collars or punishment, and we don't use 'dominance' explanations. For genuine aggression we point you to your vet and a qualified behaviourist, because that's the only honest answer.

What our own experience is worth

We write down what we see: dogs who can't be left alone yet, puppies who freeze on their first walk, older dogs who won't get into the car any more. That's hands-on experience, not research, and we present it as exactly that.

We never name a client or a client's dog unless we have explicit permission. We also never invent a client, a review or a story to make a point.

Dates and updates

Every article says when we last checked it. We only move that date when we've genuinely changed the content — not for a typo, and not because the site was republished.

Each month we go back over a few older articles: changed rules, new prices, dead links, newer research. Dog rules in the Netherlands vary by municipality and by season, so this isn't optional.

Money and independence

Nobody pays to appear in an article. We run no advertising, no sponsored posts and no affiliate links in our articles. If we name a brand, it's because it belongs in the topic, not because something changed hands.

We do sell our own services, and we don't hide it: at the bottom of an article you'll often find an invitation to get in touch. What you read in the article itself isn't shaped by that.

When we get it wrong

We want to hear about it. If you spot an error, an out-of-date rule or a source that doesn't hold up, send us a message. We'll fix it and update the date at the top of the article. If the mistake could have led someone astray, we say in the article what changed.