# SHADS....Where did it originate?



## CougarKing (4 Nov 2013)

hamiltongs said:
			
		

> Well, the alternative was crediting the dirty, dirty shads on the MCDV, so they were stuck between a bit of a rock and a hard place.  ;D



So the "shads" term is for all reservists regardless of which coast they eventually go to? Someone mentioned in another thread that they were named after a migratory fish on the east coast.  ???


----------



## Occam (4 Nov 2013)

S.M.A. said:
			
		

> So the "shads" term is for all reservists regardless of which coast they eventually go to? Someone mentioned in another thread that they were named after a migratory fish on the east coast.  ???



That's correct.  "Shads" is the lighthearted general term used for Naval Reservists, regardless of whether they're in a landlocked stone frigate or a sea-going unit.  Unlike the other terms used unofficially for reservists in other parts of the CF, you'll hear "shad" used both by Reg F and Res personnel; there's not much, if any offense taken to it (from what I've seen, anyways).


----------



## Pusser (4 Nov 2013)

SHAD = Saturday, Holiday and December sailor.

The real irony here is that I believe it may have been EDMONTON that was the centre of a large drug bust a few years ago, only that time it was the other way around.  Several key crew members were found to be ringleaders.


----------



## Privateer (4 Nov 2013)

Occam said:
			
		

> Unlike the other terms used unofficially for reservists in other parts of the CF, you'll hear "shad" used both by Reg F and Res personnel; there's not much, if any offense taken to it (from what I've seen, anyways).



It all depends on how one says it, which usually reflects how one views Reservists in general.


----------



## Occam (4 Nov 2013)

That's very true; good point.


----------



## TwoTonShackle (5 Nov 2013)

Pusser said:
			
		

> SHAD = Saturday, Holiday and December sailor.



SHAD = Suave, Handsome and Debonair.

It is good to see some recognition for the MCDV sailors.  Being a very cost effective platform, those hulls and the pier head jumping sailors don't always get the pat on the back they deserve.


----------



## medicineman (5 Nov 2013)

Pusser said:
			
		

> SHAD = Saturday, Holiday and December sailor.



SHADS - Summer Holidays/ After Dinner Soldiers(Sailors)...one of the more polite terms I remember when I was first a Reservist...most I hear/use now aren't all that polite anymore  ;D. 

MM


----------



## Sub_Guy (5 Nov 2013)

SHADS

I had read somewhere that the term SHAD originated back in WWII, and it was derived from term Shadow Sailor.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (5 Nov 2013)

A shad is a bottom dwelling fish of low market value. I have never heard the term used in a non derogatory fashion by Regular force personnel, nor used as anything else than a "badge-of-honour" by  reservists.

The funniest thing to a reservist is when he/she is on a four to six month deployment, in the middle of which a Reg force seaman starts to disparage the reserves and call them shads and demean them, as if he was sharing a good joke with his peer, only to be "informed" by his mate: "you are so right - by the way, I am a SHAD".


----------



## Sub_Guy (5 Nov 2013)

From the book Citizen Sailors Chronicles of Canada's Naval Reserve 1910-2010.

"Shad was a title bestowed on reservists by the regular navy, the former being a shadow of the latter."


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (5 Nov 2013)

I have that book, but I would be leery of considering it authoritative on anything. As I've mentioned before, even the title is wrong: the Naval reserve was first created in 1923. So they are 13 years off.

That's OK since it is not meant as a history textbook but rather as a book of stories. Thus they try to be polite.

I can't see why the regulars of WWII would have wanted to refer to reservist as such. They were already disparaged as the "wavy-navy", for one thing, and its hard after all for 10% of a force to think its shadow is 9 times bigger. That's about the reg/res proportions during the war : 90% reserve and 10% regs. And how would they distinguish between the RCNR (professional mariners enrolled for the duration that were probably as good - if not better - seaman than the regs) and the RCNVR, the real volunteers?


----------



## Edward Campbell (5 Nov 2013)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> I have that book, but I would be leery of considering it authoritative on anything. As I've mentioned before, even the title is wrong: the Naval reserve was first created in 1923. So they are 13 years off.
> 
> That's OK since it is not meant as a history textbook but rather as a book of stories. Thus they try to be polite.
> 
> I can't see why the regulars of WWII would have wanted to refer to reservist as such. They were already disparaged as the "wavy-navy", for one thing, and its hard after all for 10% of a force to think its shadow is 9 times bigger. That's about the reg/res proportions during the war : 90% reserve and 10% regs. And how would they distinguish between the RCNR (professional mariners enrolled for the duration that were probably as good - if not better - seaman than the regs) and the RCNVR, the real volunteers?




The story, as I heard it, was that the Navy was, like all of Gaul, divided into three:

     1. The Royal Canadian Navy Reserve ~ who were sailors trying to be gentlemen;   
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





                    2. The Royal Canadian Navy Volunteer Reserve ~ who were gentlemen trying to be sailors;    
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




   and

                                                                               3. The Royal Canadian Navy ~ who were neither trying to be both!    
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





Edit: grammar  :-[


----------



## FSTO (5 Nov 2013)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> I have that book, but I would be leery of considering it authoritative on anything. As I've mentioned before, even the title is wrong: the Naval reserve was first created in 1923. So they are 13 years off.
> 
> That's OK since it is not meant as a history textbook but rather as a book of stories. Thus they try to be polite.
> 
> I can't see why the regulars of WWII would have wanted to refer to reservist as such. They were already disparaged as the "wavy-navy", for one thing, and its hard after all for 10% of a force to think its shadow is 9 times bigger. That's about the reg/res proportions during the war : 90% reserve and 10% regs. And how would they distinguish between the RCNR (professional mariners enrolled for the duration that were probably as good - if not better - seaman than the regs) and the RCNVR, the real volunteers?


Didn't RCNR officers wear the chain-link ?
RCNVR wore the wavey stripes 
RCN wore the strait stripes


----------



## Privateer (5 Nov 2013)

Mods:  Perhaps a split to a "Shad" thread is warranted?  We seem to have drifted off the topic.


----------



## CougarKing (5 Nov 2013)

EDITED TO: Thank you to the Mods for the thread merge.


----------



## MARS (5 Nov 2013)

Dolphin_Hunter said:
			
		

> SHADS
> 
> I had read somewhere that the term SHAD originated back in WWII, and it was derived from term Shadow Sailor.



This is what I heard 20 yrs ago.  Sundays, Holidays And Days Off Work (civilian work, presumably)


----------



## daftandbarmy (6 Nov 2013)

I don't know about those SHADS, but I'll have you know that I am a member of the SAS

(Saturday and Sunday)  ;D


----------



## Sub_Guy (6 Nov 2013)

Dolphin_Hunter said:
			
		

> From the book Citizen Sailors Chronicles of Canada's Naval Reserve 1910-2010.
> 
> "Shad was a title bestowed on reservists by the regular navy, the former being a shadow of the latter."



I know it's unreliable, but this was mentioned in a chapter talking about the early 70's


----------



## George Wallace (6 Nov 2013)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> I don't know about those SHADS, but I'll have you know that I am a member of the SAS
> 
> (Saturday and Sunday)  ;D



Many of us were members of the SSF (Saturdays and Sundays Fuched)


----------



## Pusser (6 Nov 2013)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> I have that book, but I would be leery of considering it authoritative on anything. As I've mentioned before, even the title is wrong: the Naval reserve was first created in 1923. So they are 13 years off.



The Royal Canadian Naval Volunteer Reserve (RCNVR - non-professional sailors) was established in 1923.  However, the Naval Service Act of 1910 did establish a Reserve for professional seaman.  The Royal Navy Canadian Volunteer Reserve (RNCVR - for non-professional sailors - note the word order) was established in 1914 for service in WWI.  Thus, there has always been a reserve element of the Navy since 1910.


----------



## Stoker (6 Nov 2013)

It's not very common to hear the term Shad used much anymore. While its mostly used as a lighthearted term, I also heard it used as a derogatory term by narrow minded sailors. As a full timer for the last 18 years I usually point out the fact that many regs were reservists and we full time shads go to sea a lot and in some much more than the regs.


----------



## Sailorwest (7 Nov 2013)

Although to consider yourself to still be a reservist after 18 consecutive years of full time service is a bit of misnomer. Funcitonally, and in keeping with the NDA, you are very much in the regular force


----------



## Eye In The Sky (7 Nov 2013)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> I don't know about those SHADS, but I'll have you know that I am a member of the SAS
> 
> (Saturday and Sunday)  ;D



We used to call it the SWAT Team.

Some
Weekends
And 
Thursdays    ;D


----------



## Stoker (7 Nov 2013)

Sailorwest said:
			
		

> Although to consider yourself to still be a reservist after 18 consecutive years of full time service is a bit of misnomer. Funcitonally, and in keeping with the NDA, you are very much in the regular force



I have been fortunate to gain full time work and most of it on ship.  Even though part of a MARLANT unit, still see us treated quite differently unfortunately from the rest of the fleet.


----------

