We are on the verge of moving from one of the most vibrant, exciting, and positive years for the National Park System and the National Park Service to the prospect of one of the darker chapters for the parks and their overseeing agency.

Just the mention of Sarah Palin -- "drill baby, drill" - as a possible Interior secretary should signal the tremulous times ahead not only for the National Park System, but for all public lands, under a Trump administration. Imagine the possibilities, regardless of whether Ms. Palin moves into the Interior Department:

* Exploration for oil beneath Big Cypress National Preserve in Florida will not be eyed cautiously, but likely with enthusiasm.

From the Wall Street Journal: "Donald Trump’s surprise victory fanned expectations in the energy industry that he would clear the path for new pipelines, end U.S. participation in global climate change pacts and undo environmental regulations to boost American coal mining."

* Efforts to create a marine reserve zone at Biscayne National Park could be scuttled.

In response to a question on ocean health from Scientific American, candidate Trump responded: "My administration will work with Congress to establish priorities for our government and how we will allocate our limited fiscal resources.  This approach will assure that the people’s voices will be heard on this topic and others."

* Salvage logging in the wake of forest fires, promoted in the past by some Republicans from California, could be coming to a national park in the not-too-distant future.

From The Wilderness Society: "The Yosemite Rim Fire Emergency Salvage Act, which was introduced by Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA) in September 2013, would have opened up huge swaths of Yosemite and California’s Stanislaus National Forest to private companies so they could cut down trees damaged in the Rim Fire, all without the usual public notice or environmental review."

* A proposed hiring freeze for the federal workforce would, if implemented, exacerbate the stress already felt by an over-stretched NPS workforce.

From the Washington Post: "...Trump is hard to predict. But we know from his statements and positions, and those of his lieutenants, that the coming four years could be tough ones for the federal workforce."

* How much emphasis will the Trump administration place on rooting out sexual harassment, or any other form of harassment, from the Park Service?

If you're wondering about this, you didn't pay attention to the campaign.

* While the Obama administration has worked to reduce air pollution that's impacting the national parks, can the same be expected from a Trump administration?

From Grist.org: "So when Trump says he wants to repeal Obama’s entire Climate Action Plan, which includes the Clean Power Plan, he’s saying that he would increase the kind of pollution that dirties the air we breathe makes people sick. When he says he would revitalize the coal industry (even though he wouldn’t actually be able do it) and spur more oil and gas production, he’s saying the same thing."

* Would it be surprising to see energy development permitted right up to national park boundaries in places?

From Fortune: "When it comes to U.S. energy production, Trump has said that he’s in support of all-the-above energy, from coal to natural gas, and even to solar. However, his major stance on the energy industry is to say he’ll remove regulations."

* The Endangered Species Act could find itself endangered.

From Outdoor Life: "... when asked if there are specific regulations pertaining to forestry, wildlife, water, resource development and so on that a Trump administration would like to reduce or redo, Don Jr. said that “at a minimum, we think the following should be examined and re-evaluated: the Federal Land Management Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Clean Water Act, the Equal Justice Act and the Wild Horse and Burro Protection Act.”"

* How much support will be provided to protect parks from sea level rise?

Well, this one is tough. While President-elect Trump has called climate change a hoax, his staff in Ireland, where he has a coastal golf course, has sought permission to build a wall roughly 65 feet wide to keep the sea off the links.

From the Washington Post: “If the predictions of an increase in sea level rise as a result of global warming prove correct, however, it is likely that there will be a corresponding increase in coastal erosion rates not just in Doughmore Bay but around much of the coastline of Ireland,” the application notes. “In our view, it could reasonably be expected that the rate of sea level rise might become twice of that presently occurring.”

* Visitation to parks could fall as international visitors feel unwelcome.

From Skift: "Euromonitor, international head of travel Caroline Bremner: “Travel and tourism is (sic) directly impacted by government policies on trade and immigration. Trump’s campaign rhetoric focused on immigration and the relationship particularly with Mexico will have a direct bearing on the performance of U.S. tourism, as Mexico is expected to overtake Canada by the end of 2016 to be the largest source of tourism demand to the U.S. The Trump presidency will also impact the flow of Muslim travelers to the U.S., with the Council on Foreign Relations estimating that a potential travel ban on Muslims to the U.S. could cost up to $71 billion per year and up to 132,000 jobs."

Predicting the future in politics is not without risk, but the environment does not seem to rank particularly highly with the president-elect. 

The National Park System, with an estimated maintenance backlog of $12 billion, needs help, not fewer protections. True, Donald Trump has talked about the need to invest in the country's infrastructure, and roughly half of the Park Service's backlog is tied up in roads and bridges and other infrastructure. So let's hope he can address that.

But the agency also needs better morale and, in some areas, better leadership. It needs more interpreters to help visitors understand the wonders and history within the system. While we shouldn't treat the parks as open-air zoos, wildlife management needs support -- e.g., the current delisting effort for grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem shouldn't be rushed. Serious thought and funding needs to help parks overrun by visitation. Efforts are being made, but the next administration needs to buy into the threat of too much visitation without proper measures for preservation in place.

The incoming Trump administration should not ignore the joyous centennial celebration this year and the support it brought the National Park Service, but embrace it and seek to build on it. But build on it constructively and not simply to see how high visitation can go and how much economic output the parks can generate.

These are uncertain times for the National Park System and the National Park Service. How the Trump administration manages the parks shouldn't be done out of the public's eye. At National Parks Traveler we're moving to bolster our coverage at the exact time the parks and the Park Service need it. Details on this move will be coming in the weeks ahead, and we hope that you'll embrace it and support it.