Sands Ranch
Ranch Management Plan
Sands Properties LLC
Introduction
The Sands Ranch is located in Cochise and Pima Counties, on the west side of the San Pedro River and about 5
miles north of Huachuca City. State Highway 90 divides the east pastures from the west pastures and the
headquarters.
The entire ranch is in Major Land Resource area (MLRA) 41, Southeastern Arizona Basin and Range. About onehalf of the ranch is in Common Resource Area (CRA) 41-3, Semi-desert Grasslands, 12-16 inch precipitation
zone; the other half is in CRA 41-1, Mexican Oak-Pine Forest and Oak Savannah, 16-20” precipitation zone.
Elevations on the ranch range from a low of 3940 feet where the easternmost part slopes toward the San Pedro
River, to a high of almost 8500 feet on the Mescal Allotment with the Forest Service.
The dominant ecological sites on the east side of the ranch are Limy Upland, Limy Fan, and Sandy Loam Upland.
On the west side Loamy Upland, Limy Slopes, and various Hills sites predominate. However, there are several
other important ecological sites on the ranch. See Ecological Site map for details.
This livestock operation is primarily a cow/calf operation with calves sold at weaning time and holding only
replacement breeding stock. The grazing leases and land ownership are summarized in the table below:
Owner/Agency
Lease Number
Lease Name
Acres
Forest Service
BLM
State Land Dept.
Pima County
Sands Ranch
00318
5277
05-1181
Mescal Allotment
Sands Allotment
N/A
N/A
17,572
1080
28536
6625
8872
The ranch has been operated for the last several decades as a cow-calf operation. While the bulls are not out
year long, the breeding season and therefore the calving season has gradually lengthened over time. The cows
have been wintered on the Mescal Allotment between November 1 and April 30 and have summered on the
adjacent State, County, BLM and Private lands from May 1 to the end of October. Calves have been weaned in
the late fall or early winter and sold off the ranch.
In the fall of 2010 the ranch began a long term plan to deal with several problems that had been identified as
impediments to profitability. From a range standpoint, the summer range on the ranch has been severely reduced
by the encroachment of woody species and a reduction in grass cover. This problem has been amplified by a
concurrent loss of water developments and infrastructure. In addition the cow herd has become less productive
from both a genetic and a herd health standpoint. The decision was made to cut the herd significantly in order to
begin to deal with the herd health issues as well as to provide a window of opportunity to address the brush
encroachment and infrastructure issues.
The cow herd currently consists of 525 cows and will be expanded to 600 head in the fall/winter of 2010-2011
either through additional purchases or by retaining heifers. It is anticipated that this stocking rate will be
approximately maintained for the next 3-5 years, as the CRM plan is implemented.
Sands Ranch has been operating for (Also need a short history of the ranch)
Goals
The over-arching goal of this CRM plan is to maintain a healthy balance of cattle, native plant communities, and
native wildlife on the land that allows each to thrive. Specific goals of each plan participant are outlined below.
Sands Ranch:
1. To maintain a permanent, stable, and productive livestock operation which provides for efficient, sustained
use of the forage crop.
2. To prevent any accelerated loss of soil, water, plant or animal resources.
3. To maintain or improve the condition of the soil, water, plant and animal resources on the ranch.
4. To maintain or improve the natural ecological processes.
5. To maintain or improve other human uses and quality of life on the ranch.
Pima County:
1. Ensure the long-term survival of the full spectrum of plants and animals that are indigenous to Pima County,
through maintaining or improving the habitat conditions and ecosystem functions necessary for their survival
2. Achieve sustainable use of natural resources and consistency with habitat needs for implementation of a
Multiple-Species Conservation Plan (MSCP) by maintaining functionally healthy habitats for both wildlife and
livestock
Forest Service:
1. Provide for ecosystem diversity by maintaining or improving viable populations of al native and desirable nonnative wildlife, fish, and plant species through improved habitat management.
2. Restore rangeland to at least moderately high ecological condition, with stable soil and hydrologic conditions
and a stable-to-upward biotic trend
Do you want other general FS goals listed here?)
Bureau of Land Management:
(Need input, if you want specific goals listed)
State Land Dept.:
(John has indicated that ASLD will go with the group goals – delete header, or add a short statement to
that effect?)
Objectives
For the purpose of this plan, an objective is a specific statement of measurable results to be achieved to meet a
stated goal, within the identified time period of 3-5 years. Specific objectives of each plan participant are outlined
below.
Sands Ranch
1.
2.
3.
4.
Increase the forage diversity and production of the ranch
Continue the identified and measured upward trend of the upland ecological sites.
Maintain the economic viability of the ranch.
Improve the calving percentage of the herd to 70-75%, and have replacement heifers calve at 2 years of
age.
5. Address the problem of invading woody species.
6. Make repairs and improvements to the water distribution system a high priority.
7. Create a plan for prescribed burning as an additional method of vegetation management
Pima County (Do we want the entire list here, or edit it somewhat? Some of these are goals, really,
and others perhaps do not really have a place here.)
A. Cultural Resources
2
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
1. Maintain a comprehensive inventory of cultural and historic resources
2. Protect historic structures from further degradation
3. Protect prehistoric resources from looting
4. Actively renovate historic structures, as funds are available
Visual Resources
1. Preserve scenic landscape views
2. Prohibit or mitigate activities or projects that would have long-term impacts on the viewshed
Water Resources
1. Protect and enhance riparian areas
2. Develop a monitoring program for riparian resources
3. Monitor wells for water quality and availability
4. Minimize utilization of surface waters for livestock operation
Grazing
1. Achieve ecologically sustainable ranching through adaptive management and in compliance with our
Range Management Standards and Guidelines
2. Improve current range condition trend
3. Create or maintain rest-rotation practices
Wildlife
1. Maintain and enhance wildlife habitat on the ranch
2. Provide year-round strategic waters for wildlife use
3. Survey and monitor special status species, as identified in the SDCP
4. Maintain and enhance habitat for Pima County Priority Vulnerable Species on the ranch
5. Create the potential for reintroduction of select species
Invasive Species
1. Document occurrences of invasive species
2. Eliminate these species to the extent practicable
Roads and Recreation
1. Maintain public access across the ranch
2. Evaluate the road system based on management and resource needs
3. Designate recreation uses in appropriate areas and sign them
4. Partner with the AGFD Access program and the Adopt-a-Ranch program
Fire
1. Allow natural fires to burn in select areas that could benefit from fire
2. Utilize prescribed burns on fee lands to improve habitat condition and reduce wildfire danger
Environmental Compliance
1. Complete environmental assessments for all projects with ground disturbing impacts
2. Minimize the use of pesticides and herbicides
Forest Service (This is taken from the AMP – do we need all of it in this document?)



Livestock stocking is consistent with annual forage production and use is monitored annually. Management
controls livestock use and distribution so that sufficient herbaceous vegetation is retained to protect soils and
provide herbaceous wildlife cover; zones of heavy use are minimized. Management plans provide sufficient
flexibility to allow management to adapt to changing resource conditions.
Areas of historic heavy livestock use have increasing ground cover and litter and stable soils.
Ecological sites within the allotment have stable soils, functional hydrology and support functional biotic
communities. All areas are at or moving toward their ecological potential. Lower elevation sites are dominated by
warm season perennial grasses and are increasing in diversity of grasses, forbs and shrubs.

Native vegetation in riparian bottoms is a diverse mix of perennial grasses, forbs, shrubs and trees. Recruitment
of young trees is occurring and trees and shrubs show no evidence of high-lining or hedging. Riparian bottoms
throughout the allotments provide suitable year-round habitat for species dependent on herbaceous cover.

Occupied habitats for threatened, endangered, sensitive and management indicator species are maintained or
improved and recovery objectives are being met.

All grazing improvements on all allotments are in proper working order and are contributing toward improved
livestock distribution and pasture reliability.
3
State Land Dept. (John has indicated that group objectives are sufficient. Do we want a short note to that
effect, or just remove the header?)
BLM (need input if BLM wants specific objectives listed – not necessary, but nice)
Wildlife Management
General Recommendation from the Arizona Game and Fish Department
1) Game management. Integrate the following AGFD Species and Management Guidelines into the grazing plan to
ensure quality habitat is available for game and other wildlife species:
 Mearns’ quail
 White-tailed deer
 Mule deer
 Pronghorn
2) Species surveys. As funding opportunities or other resources become available, conduct surveys (literature and
field) for mammal, bird, reptile, amphibian, invertebrate, and plant species present on the ranch.
3)
Species focus. Actively manage for native species (animals and plants), with special attention to special status
species (e.g., those Federally listed, recognized as Species of Greatest Conservation Need under the State
Wildlife Action Plan, and/or identified on the most recent search of the Department’s Online Environmental
Review Tool.
4) Water sources.
 Modify and maintain water sources (i.e., troughs, tanks) to ensure access and availability to wildlife all year long,
even when livestock are not present.
 As ranch water system is improved, keep year-round wildlife water as a priority.
 Protect springs, seeps, and other sensitive natural special features (e.g., rock outcroppings, caves) from livestock
with secure fencing. As necessary develop alternative sources of water for livestock to protect these sensitive
areas.
 Install durable and permanent wildlife escape ramps in all livestock water troughs and tanks. Alternatively, cover
the tops of tanks to prevent accidental wildlife drowning, provided water is available to wildlife nearby (for
example, at the trough).
 Wherever possible, modify the fencing surrounding artificial water sources (i.e., tanks, troughs) to allow
unimpeded access for wildlife species.
5) Roads. Repair and re-grade dirt roads where significant erosion and cutting have occurred. Repair existing
erosion damage as necessary and feasible (e.g., backfill, gabion installation, re-grading, etc.). Utilize best
management practices to repair damaged dirt roads, such as those techniques outlined by Zeedyk.
(Zeedyk, B. 2006. "A Good Road Lies Easy on the Land..." "Water Harvesting from LowStandard Rural Roads”.)
6) Fencing. Remove unnecessary internal fencing. Modify existing fences to meet AGFD recommendations for
“wildlife friendly” livestock fences.
4
Pima County Vulnerable Species (it has been suggested that this list be an
attachment in the Appendix)
19 PRIORITY VULNERABLE SPECIES WITH MODERATE TO HIGH MODELED
HABITAT AND THEIR POTENTIAL FOF OCCURRENCE ON SANDS RANCH
Common Name
Scientific Name
Modeled
Habitat/Probability of
Presence
(High, Med, Low,
Probable)
MAMMALS
Allen’s Big-eared
Bat
Arizona Shrew
California Leafnosed Bat
Lesser Longnosed Bat
Mexican Longtongued Bat
Pale Townsend’s
Big-eared Bat
Southern Yellow
Bat
Western Red Bat
Abert’s Towhee
Bell’s Vireo
Idionycteris phyllotis
H,M,L/M
Sorex arizonae
H,M,L/L
H,M,L/MH
Macrotus californicus
Leptonycteris curasoae
yerbabuenae
Choeronycteris
mexicana
Plecotus townsendii
pallescens
H,M,L/H
Lasiurus xanthinus=ega
H,M,L/L
Lasiurus blossevillii
H,M/L-M
BIRDS
Pipilo aberti
Vireo bellii
Rufous-winged
Sparrow
Aimophila carpalis
Swainson’s Hawk
Western
Burrowing Owl
Buteo swainsoni
Athene cunicularia
hypugaea
Chiricahua
Leopard Frog
Desert Box Turtle
Ground Snake
Lowland Leopard
Frog
Huachuca Water
Umbel
Needle-spined
Pineapple Cactus
AMPHIBIANS AND REPTILES
Lithobates [=Rana]
chiricahuensis
Terrapene ornata luteola
Sonora semiannulata
Lithobates [=Rana]
yavapaiensis
PLANTS
Lilaeopsis scaffneriana
var. recurva
(Echinomastus
[=Sclerocactus]
erectocentrus var.
erectocentrus
H,M/H
H,M,L/H
M,L/M
L,M/L
No
modeled
habitat/P
H,M/H
H,M,L/LM
H,M,L/H
H,M/M-H
H,M/M
L/M
L-M/M
L-M/L
5
Range Improvements
Current Range Improvements
During the winter of 2010 the ranch completed the following improvements, with assistance from some of the agencies
involved in this CRM plan:
 Replaced the pipeline to French Joe from Gravel Pit well and installed 10,000 gallons of storage.

Extended the pipeline from French Joe to Dry Canyon and installed 5,000 gallons of storage.

Extended the French Joe pipeline under Hwy 90 to Ramsey storage on N Flat in Pasture # 1a.

Put a pump and 16,000 gallons of storage at the New Water well on N Flat in Pasture 1a.

Obtained well video logs for Cottonwood, Copper Sands and N Flat wells.

Purchased a new diesel generator unit for more reliable water pumping ability.

Completed 400 acres of brush management in the Middle Pasture (Pasture # 4).

Rebuilt existing division fences on the Flat east of Hwy 90, to separate Pastures 1a and 1b.
Proposed Range Improvements during the Next 3-5 Years

Complete 8,000-10,000 acres of brush management to address woody plant invasion. These acres have
been generally identified and mapped out during the inventory process.

Continue to repair and improve the water system according to the recently-completed ranch water
inventory and priority list. Use solar power where feasible to improve reliability and reduce the amount of
time needed to maintain the waters.
Specific Forest Service priority improvements from the new Mescal AMP are to:

Pump water from a mine in upper Mine Canyon to provide upland water to the ridges between Mine
Canyon and Christmas Tank Canyon.

Pump water from an existing storage at Cottonwood Spring to supplement the existing Cottonwood trick
tank and Christmas dirt tank.

Re-drill the Dry Canyon Well and pump water to Upper Dry Canyon trick tank.
(Any more significant planned improvements that need to be listed here?)
Grazing Management
Numbers and Season of Use
From the Forest Service, State, BLM, AND Pima County leases (formerly privately owned), and currently-owned
private ground, the recent base carrying capacity of the Sands Ranch has been estimated to be 955 animal units
(AU’s), or 11,454 animal unit months (AUM’s). For private lands, a common practice has been to use the State
Land Dept. lease numbers as an estimate of carrying capacity. This has been done for both the private lands
currently owned by the ranch, and the more than 6,000 acres purchased recently by Pima County, and is
summarized in the chart below:
6
STATE LAND DEPT.
356
AU’s
4274
AUM’s
BLM
5
AU’s
60
AUM’s
FOREST SERVICE
400
AU’s
4800
AUM’s
PIMA COUNTY
83
AU’s
992
AUM’s
PRIVATE
111
AU’s
1328
AUM’s
As a comparison, the long-term average carrying capacity as calculated after a recent NRCS inventory of the
ranch on an ecological site basis (excluding the FS lands – the new Allotment Management Plan (AMP) is based
on recent inventory and evaluation), is 836 AU (10,032 AUM) under present conditions. The calculations have
been made on a pasture-by-pasture basis independent of land ownership, and the summary is part of the
attached documentation. This recent inventory and estimate does use both water distribution and steep terrain to
make adjustments to the raw forage numbers. For management and stocking rate purposes, the estimate of total
cow/calf Animal Units must include all livestock of all ages on the ranch, adjusted for both age and type (horses,
bulls, replacement heifers, etc.)
However, there are some other factors specific to this ranch that must be considered in the estimate of current
carrying capacity:
Much of the ranch is watered by stock ponds. Although many of them are fairly reliable, and have been
considered as such for water distribution factors, a lack of livestock water in certain pastures at critical times can
significantly impact pasture use and management. This impact is magnified if livestock numbers are at or near
their maximum.
Currently, Forest Service use is limited to November 1 – April 30. This is one-half of the year, and close to onehalf of the forage AUM’s. However, this means that the remainder of the ranch must carry all of the livestock for
the primary summer growing season every year. This suggests that more conservative numbers will help to
achieve the goal of maintenance and improvement of the rangeland resources.
One of the stated objectives of this plan is to address the concern of invading woody brush species, especially on
the east side of the ranch. In the long-term addressing this problem will help to increase both the quantity and
quality of the forage base; short-term, however, the need for grazing deferment in pasture with treated areas will
also impact pasture use and livestock numbers.
The planned deferred rotation grazing system needs to be in place through a complete cycle, to both allow for
assessment and to begin to build a reserve of un-used forage for drought years and other adverse conditions.
For these reasons, for the next 3-5 years the recommendation of the CRM group is to limit carrying capacity to
25-30% below the numbers indicated in the recently-completed estimate. This would indicate a short-term
carrying capacity of 575-625 AU’s while a new grazing rotation, and as many of the proposed improvements as
possible, are implemented and begin to take effect. These recommended numbers are very similar to the current
ranch stocking rate, and the anticipated stocking rate for the next 3-5 years, which the Sands Ranch has put forth
in the introduction.
Grazing System
General
Apart from the Forest Service lands, the ranch is divided into eight main pastures and a number of smaller
pastures and traps. A best-pasture, deferred rotation grazing system will be used. The operator will determine
best pasture, along with Pima County where applicable. Such variables as pasture ecological sites, pasture size,
rainfall pattern, forage production and overall pasture readiness will influence where the cattle will be at any given
time. Past and current season of use will also be accounted for when making next-best pasture decisions.
Typically, 4-5 pastures will be grazed each year during the primary summer growing season (07/01-10/15), while
the remaining pastures receive rest during the summer period.
Specifics
Since the grazing on the Mescal Allotment is governed by the AMP, and is specifically for the period between
November 1 and April 30, the primary focus for the remainder of the ranch will be to provide adequate growing
season rest for each pasture on a regular basis.
A priority objective is to apply brush management to 1,000-3,000 acres per year depending on funding, and the
requirement is for a two-year grazing deferment during the summer growing season in these areas. This will
dictate much of the grazing plan during the summer.
The herd will be moved off the Forest in the spring and will pass through the smaller pastures adjacent to the
Forest prior to the growing season as they are branded. During the growing season they will be on the east side
of Hwy. 90 and will rotate through those pastures as needed based on the estimated carrying capacity for each
pasture. During the fall they will be gathered back to the headquarters, the calves will be weaned and the cow
herd will be moved to the Mescal Allotment for the winter. This is similar to the past use of the ranch; however,
the total numbers will be reduced for the next 3-5 years as the brush management is implemented and the herd
health issues are addressed.
7
As the water reliability and distribution is improved the number of separate cattle groups will be reduced so that
the majority of the cattle are kept together in one pasture. As the brush management is implemented and the
forage base in the treated areas begins to increase, the herd numbers will be increased. However, those gains in
capacity will have to be accompanied by improved management in order to be sustainable.
One part of the management change will be to wean the calves off the ranch and not on the rangeland; this will
reduce the total AUM’s and the impact of having multiple herds in multiple pastures during the fall of the year.
An important part of this overall strategy will be the possibility of extending the grazing season by 1-2 weeks at
either end of the specified grazing period on the Mescal Allotment, with fewer animal units for a slightly longer
period of time. This will help to provide rest at crucial times on the summer range.
Salting / Supplemental Feeding
Supplemental protein will be provided to the cow herd during the spring of the year once they leave the forest in
the form of range blocks primarily. Salt blocks and supplements are put ¼ mile from the waters, typically on the
uplands and hills.
Management Flexibility during drought and/or other unforeseen circumstances
The goal is to increase the forage base over the coming years through a combination of reductions in numbers as
well as increased brush management and water development. As gains are realized from these efforts we will
gradually increase the stocking rate back to our original numbers while maintaining adequate cover and providing
adequate rest to grazed areas. We intend to operate the ranch at an optimum sustainable level rather than a
maximum production level.
(This is a critical section, in my opinion. It needs some thought as to actual written strategy for an allimportant part of good grazing management, without being impossibly specific.)
Monitoring and Trend Assessment
Key Areas
Currently, there are 7 permanent pace-frequency monitoring transects; 6 that were established on the main ranch
in 1999 and a 7th added in 2009 on the lands owned by Pima County. As part of the CRM plan, data from these
transects will be used to make management decisions for several ranch pastures.
Also, there are several other monitoring transect location on the Forest, that are read regularly and used to
assess range trend.
During the inventory process it became apparent that there could be a benefit to adding 1-2 more permanent
transects to represent other significant range sites, especially some of the Hills sites, on the Pima County lands at
the north end.
Key Species (this section still needs work)
Common
Name
Plains
bristlegrass,
slim tridens,
sideoats
grama
Bush muhly,
black grama,
spike
pappusgrass
8
Scientific Name
Setaria
vulpiseta,
Tridens mutica,
Bouteloua
curtipendula
Muhlenbergia
porteri,
Bouteloua
eriopoda,
Enneapogon
Plant
Symbol
SEVU2,
TRMU,
BOCU
MUPO2,
BOER,
ENDE
Big sacaton,
alkali sacaton
Lehmann
lovegrass
desvauxii
Sporobolus
wrightii,
Sporobolus
airoides
Eragrostis
Lehmanniana
SPWR2,
SPAI
ERLE
Methods and Responsibilities
1. Actual Use
The lessee will record actual use data throughout the year showing when, where, and how many livestock used
the ranch during the grazing year.
2. Climate
Rainfall records will be provided by producer. There are rainfall gauges at each of the monitoring locations, plus
the ranch headquarters. Records from both the current and the previous year will be used as factors to assess
monitoring data and range trend.
3. Trend
Trend in rangeland condition will be measured using the Pace Frequency Method. Photographs will be taken at
each trend location. General views of the site may serve as the appropriate photo recordation of trend. Trend
data will be collected by NRCS, CES, FS, ASLD, BLM, AGFD, Pima County, and the producer (Agency and
County personnel will participate as available. Trend will be established over a period of 2-3 years or longer,
since data from a single year is not usually sufficient information on which to make management changes.
4. Timetable for Data Collection
Transects 1 through 6 are already established and are on a cycle of reading them every 2 years, reading 3
alternately every year. Transect 7 is new and has been read once – as standard procedure suggests, it will be
read yearly to establish a baseline and then read every 2 years. Any new transect established will follow the
same protocol, trying to achieve a balance in the number of transects to be read each year. This pattern is will
allow annual monitoring but not of all transects.
5.
Location of Key Areas
KA
Pasture #
and Name
Ecological Site
Location (UTM
coordinates)
#1
#10 - Brush
Sandy Loam
Upland 41-3
0558660 e
3509686 n
Clayey Swale 41-3
0564040 e
3511053 n
Limy Upland 41-3
0567481 e
3511569 n
#2
#3
#2 – South
Flat
#2 – South
Flat
#4
FS1 -
Loamy Upland 41-1
0556044 e
3512267 n
#5
#1a -
Limy Upland 41-3
0563081 e
3519894 n
#6
PC3 -
Loamy Upland 41-1
0549664 e
3513130 n
#7
PC1 -
Loamy Upland 41-1
0548994 e
3516256 n
#8
TBD
TBD
TBD
#9
TBD
TBD
TBD
9
Evaluation and Revision
A review of the plan will be conducted each year in cooperation with the rancher, and with as many members of
the CRM group as possible. This review will typically be at the time of monitoring in the fall of each year, and the
records of actual use data and rainfall data will be updated. Data collected from the monitoring sites will be used
to aid in management decisions. (This section could be expanded as well)
Concurrence
Accepted by:
10
Rancher - Sands Properties LLC
Date
Forest Service - District Ranger
Date
Forest Service - Range Conservationist
Date
ASLD - State Land Commissioner
Date
BLM - Area Manager
Date
BLM - Range Conservationist
Date
Pima County - Commissioner
Date
Pima County - Rangeland Manager
Date
NRCS - Resource Conservationist
Date
U of A CES - Rangeland Management Specialist
Date
AGFD - Wildlife Habitat Specialist
Date
Note: This list is possibly more comprehensive than necessary. Let me know, especially agencies, who,
how many, and correct job titles for any and all signatories. Also if I have inadvertently missed anyone.
11
APPENDIX AND LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
1) Selected ranch photographs
2) Conservation Plan map
3) Ecological Site map (topo and aerial photo views)
4) Grazing Distribution map
5) AGFD Species Management Guides – deer, pronghorn antelope, Mearns’ quail
6) HDMS list for Cochise and Pima Counties
7) Carrying capacity calculations, by pasture
(anything else?)
12