Courage of a high order might be credited to the long-tailed weasel because individuals have attacked animals much larger than the weasels. Actually, however, in few if any of these instances was the motive for attack known. That a hawk was attacked is suggested by Soper's (1919:45) account of Mustela frenata noveboracensis wherein he repeats a story told to him of a hawk observed in unsteady flight, and obviously in distress, which when it plummeted to earth was with a weasel which escaped from the observer. Charles Tatham, Jr., of Cambridge, Massachusetts, according to Seton (1929 (2): 630, 631) observed one that attacked his dog.
Persons and long-tailed weasels have figured in some rather strange encounters. For example, Oehler (1944:198) recounts that in the autumn of 1940 at Cincinnati, Ohio, an animal, mistakenly thought to be a chipmunk, was seen to dash into a hollow log whereupon pounding on the log brought out the weasel which bit and clung to the hand of one man whose companion was bitten when he attempted to free the man that was bitten first.
Seton (1929 (2): 631) writes that on the night of September 5, 1897, on Roosevelt's old ranch, near Medora, North Dakota, a man turned over his saddle (which was lying on the ground) to dislodge what was thought to be a pack-rat. The animal was a long-tailed weasel which attacked him. It ran up his legs a number of times aiming at his throat before being killed by a dog.
Criddle and Criddle (1925:146) wrote: "August 20, 1919.—A longicauda in the Insectary ran at me this morning apparently with a view to intimidating. It uttered a shrill cry while making the attack, but retreated after advancing within two feet." The same authors (op. cit.: 147) further write that a "Long-tailed Weasel was caught in a trap set for gophers, and, on being released by Miss M. Criddle, at once turned upon its liberator and bit savagely at her boot. It then moved a short distance away to a tub of water, where it drank thirstily, merely glancing at the observer from time to time while doing so, and then ran off out of sight.
"Mr. T. Criddle records a similar experience. After liberating a large weasel from a trap, it immediately rushed at him and persisted in its attack with such ferocity that it was three times picked up and thrown, on each occasion to a greater distance, before it finally abandoned its offensive.
"We have no record of a weasel making an unprovoked attack upon anyone."
Wight (1932: 164) in Michigan, detected a weasel attacking a hen. The weasel fled at Wight's approach but returned and attacked him several times. Finally the weasel went around Wight to reach the hen. In Wight's words "There was no evidence of infuriation, but rather a well directed offense at the one object, regardless of its size, which stood between the weasel and an opportunity to satisfy its desire to kill, which was probably based upon the uncontrollable urge of hunger pangs."
Weasels of each of the three North American species have been successfully kept in captivity. A type of cage satisfactory for keeping the animals in the laboratory is described by Bissonnette and Bailey (1940:761-763). Some of the captives used their teeth to break glass water-containers and to gnaw slivers of wood from the cages. Ingested slivers of wood and bits of broken glass caused the deaths of some of the captives. Weasels kept by me all were of the species Mustela frenata. They thrived on a meat diet but I was always careful to give them, every few days, if not each day, some small rodents entire, thinking that the bits of bone and fur ingested might, in some way unknown to me, keep the digestive tract in better condition than would flesh devoid of hair and bone.
Three young weasels approximately the size of mice, in the Okefinokee Swamp of Georgia, were obtained by a hunter who, according to Harper (1927:303), raised them by feeding "milk for a few days, and then fresh meat." Litters of young born in captivity have been successfully raised by the mothers (Hamilton, 1933) and success in getting the animals to breed in captivity and to rear their young is recorded by Wright (1948A). He has found, however, that the majority of his captive adult males show no interest in mating when placed with females in heat. He, therefore, uses only selected males and when a female in heat is to be bred, he places one of his responsive males with her one day, another of his responsive males with her the second day and thus alternates a couple of males for three or four days. Even so, slightly fewer than half of the females which were thus bred produced young.