In Trager v. Thor, 445 Mich. 95, 516 N.W.2d 69 (Mich. 1994), the Michigan Supreme Court recognized that to be equitable, strict liability for dog bites should not be imposed unless the liable party has been given an opportunity to assess the potential risk posed by the dog. Construing "keeping" as requiring care, custody, or control ensures the equitable application of strict liability for dog bites. As the court in Trager observed, Liability is not imposed because of a failure to restrain the animal, since the utmost care in that regard is not a defense to liability. . . . In order for such allocation of strict liability to be equitable, the liable party must have sufficient custody and sufficient control of the animal to assess whether a risk is presented by an abnormal propensity and to decide whether an animal should be brought into or remain in the community. It is this proprietary control, akin to ownership, that we hold must be present to deem a party a keeper, and potentially liable, under the common-law strict liability principle. Id. at 73.