Cost of Scouting vs Cost of Sports

[NealOnWheels]

Ran across this interesting article today.  There have been a lot of complaints on the rising cost of Scouting driving families away.  Seems that youth sports are also seeing rising costs..

https://www.foxnews.com/media/youth-sports-crisis-skyrocketing-costs-price-out-parents-threaten-childhood-health

 

Edited December 17, 2025 by NealOnWheels

[swilliams]

For us, the comparison between sports and scouting comes up with scouting being far more expensive, but my kids don't do 'club' sports.  They all participated in high school sports, with all three swimming (for at least two years), and my daughter doing track and fencing after she dropped swimming.  Youngest son is in marching band.

Swimming is least expensive.  For my youngest son (high school), it's a $200 athletic fee to the school, goggles, and gas money, since our high school doesn't have their own pool.  For my older son (collegiate swimmer), it's $80 goggles and a $350 tech suit, plus non-mandatory things like a team towel with his name on it ($60) and a sweatshirt ($45).

Fencing required a lot up front for equipment, then my daughter injured her hip before the first meet and her fencing days were over before they began.  Sad.

Marching band shares the $200 athletic fee with swimming.  We buy shirt, wool knee socks and shoes - around $75. (Our band wears a traditional winter wool kilt on the bottom.  Tops change depending on the music/theme for the year.  The school provides Scottish military parade jackets and plaids for parades. There isn't much else you have to buy, but it's a huge time commitment for parents.  We are required to solicit donations for our Pageant of the Bands and spring basket raffle, and everyone has to work part (or all) of the Pageant, as well as take at least one shift as a chaperone or doing pit crew.

Scouts...  oh boy.  Uniform - hideously expensive for what it is.  $135 to Council and National.   $150 to the Troop.  $35-250 for each monthly camping trip, depending on what we're doing.  ($35 for regular camping trip to the local scout camp or other low-cost areas.  $250 is for a trip we're taking this coming January to Vermont for X-Country skiing, fat bikes, and dogsledding.)  I just spent some Christmas money to get a new insulated sleeping pad, since I have to sleep outside most times (female SM for a boy's troop), and we've purchased backpacks, tents, sleeping bags, mess kits and so on.  And then there's always stuff that I do as Scoutmaster that I either forget to submit for reimbursement or figure it's not worth submitting.  Scouting is easily our most expensive activity.  

The troop does have some gear we can lend, and we have a policy of any scout who needs financial help not needing to pay, but most families aren't in that situation, we're just okay enough for it to hurt a bit.

[Tron]

On 12/17/2025 at 2:02 PM, NealOnWheels said:

Ran across this interesting article today.  There have been a lot of complaints on the rising cost of Scouting driving families away.  Seems that youth sports are also seeing rising costs..

https://www.foxnews.com/media/youth-sports-crisis-skyrocketing-costs-price-out-parents-threaten-childhood-health

 

LOL travel leagues $1000 a year! That's not even close to what a travel league costs for 8 weeks in my region (YES REGION!). 

On 12/30/2025 at 4:34 PM, swilliams said:

For us, the comparison between sports and scouting comes up with scouting being far more expensive, but my kids don't do 'club' sports.  They all participated in high school sports, with all three swimming (for at least two years), and my daughter doing track and fencing after she dropped swimming.  Youngest son is in marching band.

Swimming is least expensive.  For my youngest son (high school), it's a $200 athletic fee to the school, goggles, and gas money, since our high school doesn't have their own pool.  For my older son (collegiate swimmer), it's $80 goggles and a $350 tech suit, plus non-mandatory things like a team towel with his name on it ($60) and a sweatshirt ($45).

Fencing required a lot up front for equipment, then my daughter injured her hip before the first meet and her fencing days were over before they began.  Sad.

Marching band shares the $200 athletic fee with swimming.  We buy shirt, wool knee socks and shoes - around $75. (Our band wears a traditional winter wool kilt on the bottom.  Tops change depending on the music/theme for the year.  The school provides Scottish military parade jackets and plaids for parades. There isn't much else you have to buy, but it's a huge time commitment for parents.  We are required to solicit donations for our Pageant of the Bands and spring basket raffle, and everyone has to work part (or all) of the Pageant, as well as take at least one shift as a chaperone or doing pit crew.

Scouts...  oh boy.  Uniform - hideously expensive for what it is.  $135 to Council and National.   $150 to the Troop.  $35-250 for each monthly camping trip, depending on what we're doing.  ($35 for regular camping trip to the local scout camp or other low-cost areas.  $250 is for a trip we're taking this coming January to Vermont for X-Country skiing, fat bikes, and dogsledding.)  I just spent some Christmas money to get a new insulated sleeping pad, since I have to sleep outside most times (female SM for a boy's troop), and we've purchased backpacks, tents, sleeping bags, mess kits and so on.  And then there's always stuff that I do as Scoutmaster that I either forget to submit for reimbursement or figure it's not worth submitting.  Scouting is easily our most expensive activity.  

The troop does have some gear we can lend, and we have a policy of any scout who needs financial help not needing to pay, but most families aren't in that situation, we're just okay enough for it to hurt a bit.

Those prices are outrageous. Our troop is one of the largest in our district and we're charging $25 for a weekend outing. No troop dues. If the PLC picks a big fancy expensive trip it's AD HOC to the regular monthly weekend outing to prevent pricing families out of any needed monthly campouts. 

[yknot]

21 hours ago, Tron said:

LOL travel leagues $1000 a year! That's not even close to what a travel league costs for 8 weeks in my region (YES REGION!). 

Those prices are outrageous. Our troop is one of the largest in our district and we're charging $25 for a weekend outing. No troop dues. If the PLC picks a big fancy expensive trip it's AD HOC to the regular monthly weekend outing to prevent pricing families out of any needed monthly campouts. 

There is no point comparing the costs of scouts to sports, it's a waste of time and not relevant to why most people pursue either activity.  The costs for both are all over the map depending 1) where on the map you are, and 2) what level of involvement you are at. You can absolutely find travel leagues that are less than scouting. There are many access points and participation tiers. You can spend $10K or you can spend $1K. In many cases when you break down the fees and the hours involved in each activity, scouting has a higher per hour cost than sports and that's why a lot of families see it as a better value and use of their time. Both activities are great for kids at whatever level you can afford them and dependent on their interests and how that fits in with the family time and budget. Scouting needs to focus on listening to why more kids don't choose it. 

[Tron]

On 1/1/2026 at 5:56 PM, yknot said:

There is no point comparing the costs of scouts to sports, it's a waste of time and not relevant to why most people pursue either activity.  The costs for both are all over the map depending 1) where on the map you are, and 2) what level of involvement you are at. You can absolutely find travel leagues that are less than scouting. There are many access points and participation tiers. You can spend $10K or you can spend $1K. In many cases when you break down the fees and the hours involved in each activity, scouting has a higher per hour cost than sports and that's why a lot of families see it as a better value and use of their time. Both activities are great for kids at whatever level you can afford them and dependent on their interests and how that fits in with the family time and budget. Scouting needs to focus on listening to why more kids don't choose it. 

You should take some time to understand that in the market basket of extracurricular activities scouting is competing with everything from a pack of kids in a basement playing dungeons and dragons to $400 a week private league sports. If people are getting a good return on their time and money, they will spend the money. League sports are growing 43% year-over-year while scouting is shrinking and currently at 20% of it's peak membership. 

 

[InquisitiveScouter]

Sorry, I put this in the wrong thread...

------------------------------------

The biggest unadvertised cost of Scouting is the amount of volunteer adult support it takes to make a good unit level program happen.

No "pitch" that I have ever heard (outside of our unit) tells parents that "We welcome your kids, but you have to come along, too, to help us put on the program."

When you do get them to agree to help, then explain that "help" means a variety of getting trained, learning Scout skills so that you know what 'right' looks like, being a merit badge counselor, serving on the committee to help with budget, managing adult training, onboarding, advancement, uniforming, equipment, fundraising, etc, etc, etc,   Oh, and we need drivers and adults for camping, too. 

Once they learn those needs, many are out.  They want to take their kids to programs where they can dump and run, or show up occasionally with a tray of orange slices and some juice boxes.

Once upon a time, when I served Uncle Sam, our mantra in the Air Force was "We recruit Airmen, but we retain families."  And we did PR, ads, benefits, and programs to support that.  Attract individuals, but make our environment such that, as they start a family while serving (which many do), we make it comfortable for their family to have the service member stay in.   (This mindset varies across the services, though many of the family programs and benefits are duplicated in all services.  Health care, base housing, commissary and exchange, MWR [morale, welfare, and recreation], etc. )

Scouting should be, "We recruit families, but we retain the Scout."  Get the family on board, and give them benefits for their Scouts (a program of adventure) , and the youth will stay, keeping the parents involved.

[yknot]

1 hour ago, Tron said:

You should take some time to understand that in the market basket of extracurricular activities scouting is competing with everything from a pack of kids in a basement playing dungeons and dragons to $400 a week private league sports. If people are getting a good return on their time and money, they will spend the money. League sports are growing 43% year-over-year while scouting is shrinking and currently at 20% of it's peak membership. 

 

I understand what's out there very well. Problems with value perception is why scouting is declining. 

[Tron]

23 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Sorry, I put this in the wrong thread...

------------------------------------

The biggest unadvertised cost of Scouting is the amount of volunteer adult support it takes to make a good unit level program happen.

No "pitch" that I have ever heard (outside of our unit) tells parents that "We welcome your kids, but you have to come along, too, to help us put on the program."

When you do get them to agree to help, then explain that "help" means a variety of getting trained, learning Scout skills so that you know what 'right' looks like, being a merit badge counselor, serving on the committee to help with budget, managing adult training, onboarding, advancement, uniforming, equipment, fundraising, etc, etc, etc,   Oh, and we need drivers and adults for camping, too. 

Once they learn those needs, many are out.  They want to take their kids to programs where they can dump and run, or show up occasionally with a tray of orange slices and some juice boxes.

Once upon a time, when I served Uncle Sam, our mantra in the Air Force was "We recruit Airmen, but we retain families."  And we did PR, ads, benefits, and programs to support that.  Attract individuals, but make our environment such that, as they start a family while serving (which many do), we make it comfortable for their family to have the service member stay in.   (This mindset varies across the services, though many of the family programs and benefits are duplicated in all services.  Health care, base housing, commissary and exchange, MWR [morale, welfare, and recreation], etc. )

Scouting should be, "We recruit families, but we retain the Scout."  Get the family on board, and give them benefits for their Scouts (a program of adventure) , and the youth will stay, keeping the parents involved.

This isn't true at all. My buddy had to attend every game and practice his daughter played in league volleyball (which cost him $3200 every "Series"/"quarter"/"league period" aka she played 3 a year outside varsity volleyball for all 4 years of high school). There may be some leagues that you can dump and run; however, that is becoming the old standard much like it was the old standard in scouting. As the lawsuit sharks circle dump-and-run is going away even in league sports. I remember him calling me going "I am driving a day and a half to St. Louis right now because if I am not butt in bleachers they will bench my daughter which will threaten her varsity slot when she returns to school.". 

Dumping and running might have been true in the interarm, but it is going away.  

21 hours ago, yknot said:

I understand what's out there very well. Problems with value perception is why scouting is declining. 

It's not declining due to value perception. It's declining due to lack of delivery. 

On paper the programs provided by Scouting America are among the top youth programs in the world; yes, the world. The problem is that execution of this program is highly variable (even from one side of the town to another), there is no quality control, and councils are too weak to do anything about it because they are too busy trying to survive instead of running the program. Scouting America just lost somewhere between 300k and 500k of it's youth membership in the past 90 days; that membership churn is not a value perception, we sold those families on the value, they where here, they saw the value, they left because we didn't deliver.

 

[BetterWithCheddar]

On 1/2/2026 at 10:15 PM, InquisitiveScouter said:

The biggest unadvertised cost of Scouting is the amount of volunteer adult support it takes to make a good unit level program happen.

Well said. I could not agree more.

 

8 hours ago, Tron said:

It's not declining due to value perception. It's declining due to lack of delivery. 

Also true.

[BetterWithCheddar]

We live in a large suburban school district. There are 200 boys in my son's class. So far, in elementary school, about 50 of the 200 come out for basketball every year. Of those 50, only 10 make the top team. The cost of youth sports keeps increasing because it's just an arm's race to give your kid a slight advantage. When I was a kid most player development occurred within the (low cost) school program. Today, it's closer to 1/3 (if that). Most kids hone their skills through some combination of private small group training, personal trainers, shooting cages, summer camps, and travel teams. My son is pretty good, but I'm not delusional. I don't think he'll ever play professionally, get a college scholarship, or even start for his high varsity team. I just want him to make the team (if he desires).

My wife and I are generally supportive because:

1. He seems to be enjoying himself.
2. He's exercising and socializing.
3. He's established a feedback loop where extra practice and offseason work often results in noticeable improvement. He now gets excited about other pursuits like math and reading because he correlates practice with improvement.

[yknot]

11 hours ago, Tron said:

 

It's not declining due to value perception. It's declining due to lack of delivery. 

On paper the programs provided by Scouting America are among the top youth programs in the world; yes, the world. The problem is that execution of this program is highly variable (even from one side of the town to another), there is no quality control, and councils are too weak to do anything about it because they are too busy trying to survive instead of running the program. Scouting America just lost somewhere between 300k and 500k of it's youth membership in the past 90 days; that membership churn is not a value perception, we sold those families on the value, they where here, they saw the value, they left because we didn't deliver.

 

I partly agree but it's kind of a chicken and egg situation. Value perception is lacking because the program is so difficult to deliver that quality is inconsistent and often poor. But even when well administered there are multiple aspects of the program that no longer work well, appeal to, or provide comparative value to an increasingly large demographic.  

[yknot]

On 1/2/2026 at 11:15 PM, InquisitiveScouter said:

Sorry, I put this in the wrong thread...

------------------------------------

The biggest unadvertised cost of Scouting is the amount of volunteer adult support it takes to make a good unit level program happen.

No "pitch" that I have ever heard (outside of our unit) tells parents that "We welcome your kids, but you have to come along, too, to help us put on the program."

When you do get them to agree to help, then explain that "help" means a variety of getting trained, learning Scout skills so that you know what 'right' looks like, being a merit badge counselor, serving on the committee to help with budget, managing adult training, onboarding, advancement, uniforming, equipment, fundraising, etc, etc, etc,   Oh, and we need drivers and adults for camping, too. 

Once they learn those needs, many are out.  They want to take their kids to programs where they can dump and run, or show up occasionally with a tray of orange slices and some juice boxes.

 

It's true the high cost of volunteering in scouting is often unacknowledged, especially when compared to other youth activities. This is part of the value perception equation. It's also not as simple as thinking parents want to dump and run. Potential volunteers who are used to operating in more functional organizations find the systemic dysfunction in scouting incomprehensible. The onboarding experience in most youth activities is efficient and user friendly. Trying to onboard in scouts can be an ordeal. That makes the first point of entry a complete turn off for a lot of competent adults. Not necessarily dumping kids but running backwards away from dysfunction. 

[BetterWithCheddar]

2 hours ago, yknot said:

Potential volunteers who are used to operating in more functional organizations find the systemic dysfunction in scouting incomprehensible. The onboarding experience in most youth activities is efficient and user friendly. Trying to onboard in scouts can be an ordeal. That makes the first point of entry a complete turn off for a lot of competent adults. Not necessarily dumping kids but running backwards away from dysfunction. 

This thread is really hitting the nail on the head. I wish someone with influence would take note.

Many of the other youth programs we've been exposed to either have 1) an affiliation with the school district that allows families to get access to facilities and quality instructors at a greatly subsided rate or 2) a for-profit operator that is highly motivated to provide a quality program.

My wife (an IT project manager) is appalled by the way our Pack operates (even though it's probably one of the better units in the area). My response is always the same - "We're just a handful of parents doing our best. No one else will step up."

[DuctTape]

Often in Scouting the answers were part of the program; the growth opportunities for the scout. Adults (meaningful) over time have diluted the program and these growth opportunities. Cost being discussed is just one example. The concept of cost was (should still be?) a learning/growth opportunity for scouts. "A scout pays his own way". A simpler program without bells and whistles for which a scout can earn enough with odd jobs, chores, allowances to pay for it. Adults intervened and created troop fundraisers, camps exploited the fundraising and built dining halls and other amenities to summer camps (in contradiction to living under canvas). Costs rose, parents ponied up, to only ask about ROI. Fun and adventure was not enough, merit badges earned became the metric. And the downward cycle continues. 

BP, West, GBB, etc... understood how all parts of the program were in concert fundamentally held together by the concept of not doing for scouts what they can do for themselves. That glue is what ties the program together, even more than 100 years later. The systematic replacing of that glue by adults to make things more efficient, or more modern or more "xyz" is why the program cannot hold itself together. 

Adults asking about cost/value is a symptom of the systemic failure of adults in Scouting to adhere to the basic tenets of program delivery in an attempt to increase efficiency, or market share or other business terms. The answers are and have always been in the program delivery; Scouts learning to do for themselves and others.

[Tron]

17 hours ago, BetterWithCheddar said:

We live in a large suburban school district. There are 200 boys in my son's class. So far, in elementary school, about 50 of the 200 come out for basketball every year. Of those 50, only 10 make the top team. The cost of youth sports keeps increasing because it's just an arm's race to give your kid a slight advantage. When I was a kid most player development occurred within the (low cost) school program. Today, it's closer to 1/3 (if that). Most kids hone their skills through some combination of private small group training, personal trainers, shooting cages, summer camps, and travel teams. My son is pretty good, but I'm not delusional. I don't think he'll ever play professionally, get a college scholarship, or even start for his high varsity team. I just want him to make the team (if he desires).

My wife and I are generally supportive because:

1. He seems to be enjoying himself.
2. He's exercising and socializing.
3. He's established a feedback loop where extra practice and offseason work often results in noticeable improvement. He now gets excited about other pursuits like math and reading because he correlates practice with improvement.

 

15 hours ago, yknot said:

I partly agree but it's kind of a chicken and egg situation. Value perception is lacking because the program is so difficult to deliver that quality is inconsistent and often poor. But even when well administered there are multiple aspects of the program that no longer work well, appeal to, or provide comparative value to an increasingly large demographic.  

What parts do you feel do not work well any longer? 

11 hours ago, yknot said:

It's true the high cost of volunteering in scouting is often unacknowledged, especially when compared to other youth activities. This is part of the value perception equation. It's also not as simple as thinking parents want to dump and run. Potential volunteers who are used to operating in more functional organizations find the systemic dysfunction in scouting incomprehensible. The onboarding experience in most youth activities is efficient and user friendly. Trying to onboard in scouts can be an ordeal. That makes the first point of entry a complete turn off for a lot of competent adults. Not necessarily dumping kids but running backwards away from dysfunction. 

I totally see this. Here's a good story to illustrate. One of the doctors my kids were seeing was very supportive of scouting. I asked her why she didn't have her kids in scouting. She replied that her husband was an eagle, a veteran, and an accomplished outdoorsman and they simply couldn't handle how poorly every unit in their area functioned so decided to just focus on family camping. 

8 hours ago, BetterWithCheddar said:

This thread is really hitting the nail on the head. I wish someone with influence would take note.

Many of the other youth programs we've been exposed to either have 1) an affiliation with the school district that allows families to get access to facilities and quality instructors at a greatly subsided rate or 2) a for-profit operator that is highly motivated to provide a quality program.

My wife (an IT project manager) is appalled by the way our Pack operates (even though it's probably one of the better units in the area). My response is always the same - "We're just a handful of parents doing our best. No one else will step up."

I have noticed that the more competent people who have management experience or operational coordination experience struggle the most with scouting. Also key 3 often are selected based on random attributes and not how Scouting America recommends (skills and ability based selection); it becomes impossible to intellectually or emotionally handle dealing with incompetent people who can't handle coordinating enough car space for a weekend campout let alone the far more complex issues that arise within scouting.