Characters of the species.—Size large: Total length 300 to 550 mm.; tail two-fifths to seven-tenths of length of head and body, with distinct black pencil at end; caudal vertebrae 19 to 23; skull with long precranial portion; postglenoidal length, expressed as a percentage of the condylobasal length, less than 47 in females and ordinarily less than 46 in males; upper parts brown; light-colored underparts, in summer pelage, tinged with buffy or yellowish and continuous from chin to inguinal region; some subspecies (southwestern United States, México, Central America, and Florida) with white or yellowish facial markings which do not occur in any other American species of the genus Mustela.
Geographic variation.—Forty-two subspecies are recognized, and the species is geographically more variable than any of the other 3 American species. Color, color-pattern especially on the head, relative proportions of the tail, hind feet, body including the head, and shape and size of the skull are the principal features in which geographic variation has been noted. The variation in the skull extends to the basicranial region (shape and size of tympanic bullae and related structures), interorbital region and preorbital region.
Natural History.—Habitat and Numbers.—As has already been remarked, the long-tailed weasel is absent from the extreme desert of the southwestern United States and northwestern México. Possibly the absence of water to drink is the limiting factor. In southern Nevada the finding of weasels only in places that were well watered, even though small rodents suitable as food for weasels were even more abundant in the surrounding desert, supports this possibility that the absence of water to drink is the limiting factor. Also at Berkeley, California, in early December of 1927 in the canyon at the head of Dwight Way and in the autumn and winter of 1928 in Strawberry Canyon on the campus of the University of California, I trapped extensively for this species in different habitats and obtained, in all, four individuals no one of which was farther than 10 feet from water. The lesser cruising range of the individual weasel than of, say, the coyote, probably explains why, in an arid region, for example Pahranagat Valley, Nevada, only the meadow mice and their riparian associates are preyed upon by the long-tailed weasel whereas the coyote preys upon these riparian rodents and also upon the kangaroo rats and other rodents which are so abundant in adjoining habitats that are devoid of water.
In areas where water is available every few hundred yards, no particular habitat seems to be avoided in summer providing there is food for the long-tailed weasel. In winter (January and March) there obviously was a choice of habitat, possibly occasioned by more abundant food or more satisfactory shelter, or both, in Centre County, Pennsylvania, where Glover (1943B) found the population density in the chestnut-oak habitat to be one weasel per 6.5 acres in areas of tree cuttings and slash and one weasel per 13.3 acres in the open forest. In the scrub oak-pitch pine forest type the population was one weasel per 26.4 acres in tree cuttings and slash and one weasel per 38.2 acres in the open forest. No weasel was found in an area of 9.6 acres comprising a wood lot, the edge of the forest, abandoned fence rows and an abandoned orchard. The two types of forest in which he did find weasels, 25 in all, comprised 381.6 acres. Glover's (op. cit.) data is the only precise information known to me on actual numbers of long-tailed weasels in a given area of any considerable size.
Fluctuations which I elsewhere (1946:57) have designated as multiannual fluctuations occur in this species but seemingly not in the degree that they do in Mustela erminea. This difference between the two species is to be expected because M. frenata does not range so far northward toward the polar regions as does M. erminea and populations of most kinds of animals in the polar, at least in the arctic, regions are subject to more extreme and more regular fluctuations than are kinds of animals in temperate or tropical regions. Indication of the means by which decrease in the weasel population is brought about is afforded by Osgood's (1935:156) observations around Rutland, Vermont. In the late winter of 1934, tracks indicated that weasels left their usual haunts and hunted cross lots, vainly trying to find food. Testing of the small mammal population in the spring and summer of 1934 showed that it was at low ebb. In the fall of 1934 mice and shrews were abundant again but weasels seemed to be entirely absent. The decrease in the population of weasels lagged behind the decrease in the population of the herbivorous prey as did the subsequent increase; this, of course, is the normal relation of carnivorous species of mammals and their prey, at least in and above the Transition Life-zone.
The average distance away from the central den which four weasels (sex unspecified) traveled in a single night at Ames, Iowa, was 312 feet; the maximum distance was 642 feet. These data were obtained in the winter of 1939 by Polderboer, Kuhn and Hendrickson (1941:115) who studied the tracks in the snow. In Manitoba, Criddle and Criddle (1925:143) noted that a female which lived in their basement often wandered more than half a mile away in search of food. In Michigan, Quick (1944:75) found the maximum distance traveled in one day (= night?) by a large male to be 3.43 miles although two miles was the average distance traveled by this individual. In 1942, from January 4 to March 4, in Centre County, Pennsylvania, Glover (1943B) studied tracks of 11 males and 10 females, in newly fallen snow, and ascertained that the distance traveled in a single night averaged 704 (60-2535) feet for the male and 346 (20-1420) feet for the female. The weasels in the open timber traveled farther per trip than those in the brushland and dense stands of trees.