I mean this more as a question than a rant, honest.
Had a reposition flight yesterday, moved the cub to S23 from 70S, and the Pacer vice versa. Briefed the flights in the morning, all went well. 15ish+ miles of viz the whole time. Briefing included a TFR just east of DEW, no big deal - overfly the airport and make appropriate radio calls.
Got back before 1, all good. Looked at skyvector later in the afternoon, TFR popped up right next to 70S for a fire that's been burning a couple days. https://tfr.faa.gov/save_pages/detail_1_5493.html
Went active before it was posted by 4 minutes. Hmmm. Had I not needed to get home earlier for work, I'd have blown right through it totally unaware - not great cell reception at S23. My normal route would have been fine, but I'd have run through it in my effort to avoid the other TFR(no longer active as of this post).
I usually pick up flight following when I'm travelling far, but there's no radio coverage let alone radar when I'm flying the river locally.
Also of note, many of us like to go camping for a few days where such coverage isn't available either.
Anyone heard of related issues with pop-up TFRs re:enforcement? Not asking anyone to self-incriminate, I'm not the FAA but I do hope they're reading. Am I too worried - does doing your best and using common sense prevail?
Since it could come up in relation - I'm generally pro ADSB. We have in/out on the R182, it's a great safety tool. I'd like to equip it on the other planes. But, with a situation like this and the chance that a database query would be all that's needed to ding you per regulation, it rubs me the wrong way a bit.
What's everyone else doing for briefing/awareness on this?
Side note - I was on a helitack crew for a couple years. This was 15 years ago, but we never had a problem with aircraft conflict. This is one where seeing and avoiding fires seems like it'd be most of it, and exercising appropriate caution and courtesy would be the rest. I understand filing TFRs from the liability perspective, it just feels a bit capricious from a regulatory standpoint.

