CHEYENNE -- In a move that sparked sharp criticism from environmental groups, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on Friday announced that it once again is proposing a plan that could end federal protections for gray wolves in Montana and Idaho while leaving them in place in Wyoming.

The federal agency's push comes after U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy of Montana last week signed an order reinstating federal protections for the wolves in all three states. Ruling in a lawsuit brought by a coalition of environmental groups, the judge this summer barred the Fish and Wildlife Service from turning wolf management over to the states.

Molloy ruled that Wyoming's management plan in particular wouldn't give wolves adequate protection. Wyoming has proposed that wolves be classified as predators that could be shot on sight in much of the state.

Friday's announcement by the Fish and Wildlife Service says the agency will take public comments until Nov. 28 on the same proposed wolf delisting rule the agency released early last year. The agency says there are now more than 1,400 wolves in the three states.

Bruce Salzburg, Wyoming attorney general, said Friday the FWS's proposed 2007 rule would allow removing federal protections for wolves only in Montana and Idaho. The rule would also allow lifting federal protections for wolves in Wyoming, but only if the federal agency ruled that Wyoming's management plan was adequate.

The FWS found Wyoming's management plan acceptable before the environmental groups mounted their legal challenge. But the agency won't comment now on whether it still believes Wyoming's plan is acceptable now that Molloy has ruled it is not.

Salzburg said he sees little doubt the federal agency is ready to leave Wyoming behind.

"I expect they will look to the judge's decision and determine that Wyoming's regulatory mechanisms are inadequate, and go forward with an attempt to delist in the other two states," Salzburg said.

Salzburg said Wyoming ultimately intends to address Molloy's concerns by modifying the state's wolf management plan and regulations. However, the Wyoming Legislature doesn't convene until January, so there's no way the state could adopt new regulations that the federal agency might find acceptable and have them considered in the federal government's current delisting proposal.

Jamie Rappaport Clark is executive vice president of Defenders of Wildlife, one of the groups that sued over the wolf delisting. She's also a former director of the Fish and Wildlife Service under President Clinton. She said Friday her group is concerned about the agency's current approach.

"It's a hasty action that undermines the serious work and cooperation among all the stakeholders that's necessary before proposing any new rule," Clark said. "They just took the rule back. They're in essence rushing to ram this flawed rule through the current administration. And it's not giving the Fish and Wildlife Service time to address the serious concerns expressed earlier this year by the federal court in Missoula."

Salzburg, asked if it appears to him that the Fish and Wildlife Service is trying to resolve the issue before the end of the Bush administration, responded that he had no idea what's on the minds of agency officials.

Ed Bangs, wolf recovery coordinator for the Fish and Wildlife Service in Montana, said Friday that there are people in his agency who would like to see the wolf delisting process wrapped up by the end of the Bush administration. He said it's possible the agency will make a decision before then, but denied that desire is driving the agency to act quickly on the delisting process.

"This timing is set by the litigation and all that kind of stuff," Bangs said. "A lot of people are going to try to use this as a political deal."

Bangs said his agency hasn't decided whether Wyoming's management plan is inadequate, or if the state should be left behind in this round of the wolf delisting process.

"We're not putting any time line on it," he said. "The only thing I'm putting on it is we're going to take whatever time we need to do a good job and just use the best science."

Jenny Harbine is an attorney for Earthjustice, the law firm that represented the environmental coalition in challenging the delisting process.

"This is disappointing to say the least," Harbine said Friday. "We are very close to achieving a sustainable wolf population in the Northern Rockies. And we hope that the potential for a recovery success is not short-circuited by a premature delisting proposal."

Harbine said she has concerns about the legality and biological sufficiency of any plan that calls for delisting wolves in Montana and Idaho while leaving them under federal protection in Wyoming.

"The service has to treat this population as what it is, which is a single population of wolves," Harbine said. "Each recovery area is dependent on the others to maintain biological health. The legal reason is simply that the service is not permitted to treat portions of a population in isolation for the purpose of delisting. It cannot take a piecemeal approach to delisting."