700 gallon Fish Stocking Ideas

[Lepisosteus]

I disagree with breeding being a sign of health, rather more of an instinct of something that has to be done before the fish die so they can pass their genes on. Siamese fighting fish in bowls, for example, will build bubble nests. But clearly they aren't thriving in said bowls, so it stands to reason they're acting instinctually, and the same applies to the remainder of those species.
I see no reason to believe they're acting on anything but instinct.

Let me ask you this: have you ever seen an arowana in a tank of at least 7.32m by 1.83m in footprint? You may consider an arowana reasonably active in a 1135-2650 liter, but there's a lot more room to be active in a tank at least 1.5x as wide as the fish and several times longer than it than there is in a tank narrower than or only as wide as the fish, and only a few times as long.
From what I read in the thread I linked (from DrownedFishonFire), silver arowanas are a reasonably active species. They are therefore not going to be able to display their natural activity in conditions as cramped as you describe, and if the owner has never seen them in a larger tank (as I described above), they may be misled to believe that that's how active they are when they're thriving, while they actually aren't.

I consider a fish thriving instead of surviving if it's in a tank that allows it to fully behave as it would in the wild (such as being as active as it would be in the wild, and having enough space to comfortably turn around without having to bend like it would in a tank only as wide as or narrower than it) as opposed to a tank that won't kill it but does not necessarily provide for its needs that it won't die without (but nonetheless still needs for reasons other than life and death).

In short, as you were probably able to figure out, I generally share the sentiments of Stanzzzz7 from the last arowana tank size thread that I linked.

Captive breeding of a fish is a benchmark of success for Fish keepers being a testament to the quality of life that they provide. A beta that lays eggs in captivity is a healthy happy beta. Regardless if it’s in a bowl or a pond, clearly the right conditions were met for the fish to produce eggs. If conditions are not desirable for a fish the fish will not produce eggs or withhold the eggs and never lay them which often leads to infection or an infertile spawn. An argument could be made for stress induced spawning but if the fish generated and then lays eggs in captivity you can consider your work a success.

Once again you are giving information on a topic you have no experience in. Stick to your 2” loaches mate

 

[Backfromthedead]

5.08 cm loaches*

 

[Lepisosteus]

I consider a fish thriving instead of surviving if it's in a tank that allows it to fully behave as it would in the wild (such as being as active as it would be in the wild, and having enough space to comfortably turn around without having to bend like it would in a tank only as wide as or narrower than it) as opposed to a tank that won't kill it but does not necessarily provide for its needs that it won't die without (but nonetheless still needs for reasons other than life and death).

Have you ever been to the Amazon and seen an arowana in nature? Have you seen them first hand in less than 2ft of water for 4 months of the year with their back nearly out of the water within a flooded bog feeding on insects? If not then how can you compare it to an aquarium? Because you saw an overweight sluggish one at a zoo once?

Have you seen a northern pike in nature? The fastest freshwater fish in the world spends 95% of its days lying in the weeds. If I keep a pike in a 55 gallon fish tank and it lies on the bottom would you deem that fish healthy as it’s doing what it does in nature? This is why many, including myself would argue the only verifiable measurement of fish health would be reproduction in addition to activity and feeding. That’s why it’s the goal of the best fish keepers in the world to replicate conditions in order for their fish to breed. It’s a sign of success, it’s a sign that you have mastered the species.


Again, please stop your constant posting on topics you lack any experience in. Stop regurgitating things you have read from someone else who has done the same thing.

 

[MultipleTankSyndrome]

To respond to the spawning part: I would think more along the lines of there was nothing explicitly preventing the fish from spawning.
Even in a bowl for example, there is enough room to make a bubble nest (as can be seen whenever one heads to the pet store), despite the lack of swimming space. Spawning does not require as much space as exercise and therefore is doable in a tank where the fish does not have enough space for exercise.

I also think you may be conflating healthy, happy, and unstressed fish being the ones that spawn with fish having the resources to spawn being the ones that do so. Spawning is a matter of resources (given how much resources that eggs for example take up), and given that fish in tanks that are too small can still be adequately fed, they can therefore have the resources to spawn.

And again, spawning is a behavior fish do because they have the instinct to, not because they are happy and healthy. Salmon for example are in quite poor shape and very likely highly stressed (or at least underwent a lot of stress) by the time they finish their large migration, but they spawn anyway because their instinct to do so told them to make the big migration and do it.
And of course the previously mentioned fighting fish in bowls is support for this too.

For the rest, fish have hard times to go through in nature. The dry season in the Amazon is an excellent example.
I would think that if they wanted to inhabit places like that, they'd seek it out even in the wet season. But they don't, which makes me think they prefer the deep, spacious, full rivers of the wet season.

What's more, using common sense (as I mention below), we can deduct that a 208 liter is too small for a northern pike even if it allows the pike to lie as it would in nature while waiting for prey. That 208 liter does not allow it to make bursts of speed and turn around without having to bend/squeeze, 2 more things it would do in nature.
It also doesn't allow the pike much space to alter its position to be more comfortable if it so chose, something it could easily do in nature while waiting for prey.

Finally, although I may not have experience, I do believe some common sense can be used to give advice on topics one has no experience in (given that it is common sense and therefore widely applicable). The other thread about an arowana tank size is one of the best examples of that, with excellent common sense-based points from puSkar and Stanzzz even though they haven't had arowana.

At the end of the day I'm basically trying to deliver the same message Stanzzz was in the other thread. Although I would of course have used the metric system, I'll quote it here. Just replace the 1135 liter with 2650 liter, but the premise is the same.

"If your happy to contain an active predator that could grow anywhere from 3 to 4 feet in 300 gallons then go for it.
There are many other fish you could choose that a 300 would make a spacious comfortable home for. I would rather stock with fish that could move freely and be able to swim at full speed, something that i didn't grow to pity so much. At the end of the day its your call op. To buy a fish that gets to big for your aquarium with the attitude, it's probably better than what someone else would give it is ridiculous. Your just promoting the problem."

Now I think I've had enough with this thread.

 

[Lepisosteus]

I also think you may be conflating healthy, happy, and unstressed fish being the ones that spawn with fish having the resources to spawn being the ones that do so. Spawning is a matter of resources (given how much resources that eggs for example take up), and given that fish in tanks that are too small can still be adequately fed, they can therefore have the resources to spawn.

And again, spawning is a behavior fish do because they have the instinct to, not because they are happy and healthy. Salmon for example are in quite poor shape and very likely highly stressed (or at least underwent a lot of stress) by the time they finish their large migration, but they spawn anyway because their instinct to do so told them to make the big migration and do it.
And of course the previously mentioned fighting fish in bowls is support for this too.

i think this is where you keep making a mistake. The salmon is not stressed until the moment it reproduces as the act of reproduction is stressful on all species. It is not a survival instinct. It is an indication of a thriving (healthy) ecosystem. The species or individual understands that there’s enough resources to supplement the life cycle of its offspring so it reproduces. It’s a testament to health. It’s in fact the only accepted testament to species health. Why do you think it’s such a big deal if a polar bear reproduces in captivity?

You can keep a fish for its entire lifecycle and it may never reproduce. You can feed it endlessly and provide it with adequate space but it may never spawn or show characteristics of spawning. This is actually very common and you see it all the time on this forum. “Why has my X not spawned yet”. Simply put there is something off.

Take your Ideology for example. Say you keep your pair of loaches for 15 years and they never reproduce. In nature your fish would have likely reproduced multiple times therefore you are missing a critical component of what allows that species to thrive. So if your loaches never reproduce, never create eggs, you have technically failed to reproduce nature and failed at providing an ecosystem by which the species can thrive.

if the fish is not happy it will not reproduce. It likely won’t even produce eggs. Whether that be due to temperature being off, to much hardness, or not enough food on the macro and micro level. In a species, in any and all species the primary function is to reproduce.

Humans also share that same function. While ours is a little more complex as there’s significantly more external factors. If you are able to provide, have your life in order, and are in a relationship you will likely reproduce. You are in your teens, you’ve likely experienced a sudden urge by now…

 

[Lepisosteus]

"If your happy to contain an active predator that could grow anywhere from 3 to 4 feet in 300 gallons then go for it.
There are many other fish you could choose that a 300 would make a spacious comfortable home for. I would rather stock with fish that could move freely and be able to swim at full speed, something that i didn't grow to pity so much. At the end of the day its your call op. To buy a fish that gets to big for your aquarium with the attitude, it's probably better than what someone else would give it is ridiculous. Your just promoting the problem."

“could” grow to 4’. Very likely won’t and if it does will take a very long time. I’m sure at a certain point you would look at your 3-4’ fish and give it a bigger home? I don’t think anyone here said a 4’ arowana SHOULD go in a 300 gallon tank. I don’t think anyone said a 4’ arowana COULD go in a 300 gallon. The average captive size is what, 30”? That fish, while not ideal would be perfectly fine in a 300 gallon. It likely wouldn’t even notice an extra 2’ in length if you provided it.

In addition, the only way you are getting a 4’ arowana is if you buy a full sized wild caught fish. Like you said, at that point I’d hope you have some common sense just like the northern pike situation.

You are taking the extreme endpoint in hopes to prove your sub par argument. More than likely you will buy a 3” arowana. It will take 1-2 years to hit 24”. Another 1-5 ish years to hit 30”. Another 5+ years, possibly never hitting 36”. If you have kept the fish alive for 12 years I’d deem it a success. Stress will kill an animal faster than you think. If the fish was stressed I don’t think you would be on year 8-12.

 

[PhishMon84]

Everyone knows the rule is 1 inch per gallon so even with the high measurement of 42 inches you can fit approximately 16.7 arowanas in the 700 gallon tank.

lemme get that 0.7

 

[celebrist]

I had a really rough Monday. this thread at least has cheered me up a bit

 

[Caveden]

To respond to the spawning part: I would think more along the lines of there was nothing explicitly preventing the fish from spawning.
Even in a bowl for example, there is enough room to make a bubble nest (as can be seen whenever one heads to the pet store), despite the lack of swimming space. Spawning does not require as much space as exercise and therefore is doable in a tank where the fish does not have enough space for exercise.

I also think you may be conflating healthy, happy, and unstressed fish being the ones that spawn with fish having the resources to spawn being the ones that do so. Spawning is a matter of resources (given how much resources that eggs for example take up), and given that fish in tanks that are too small can still be adequately fed, they can therefore have the resources to spawn.

And again, spawning is a behavior fish do because they have the instinct to, not because they are happy and healthy. Salmon for example are in quite poor shape and very likely highly stressed (or at least underwent a lot of stress) by the time they finish their large migration, but they spawn anyway because their instinct to do so told them to make the big migration and do it.
And of course the previously mentioned fighting fish in bowls is support for this too.

For the rest, fish have hard times to go through in nature. The dry season in the Amazon is an excellent example.
I would think that if they wanted to inhabit places like that, they'd seek it out even in the wet season. But they don't, which makes me think they prefer the deep, spacious, full rivers of the wet season.

What's more, using common sense (as I mention below), we can deduct that a 208 liter is too small for a northern pike even if it allows the pike to lie as it would in nature while waiting for prey. That 208 liter does not allow it to make bursts of speed and turn around without having to bend/squeeze, 2 more things it would do in nature.
It also doesn't allow the pike much space to alter its position to be more comfortable if it so chose, something it could easily do in nature while waiting for prey.

Finally, although I may not have experience, I do believe some common sense can be used to give advice on topics one has no experience in (given that it is common sense and therefore widely applicable). The other thread about an arowana tank size is one of the best examples of that, with excellent common sense-based points from puSkar and Stanzzz even though they haven't had arowana.

At the end of the day I'm basically trying to deliver the same message Stanzzz was in the other thread. Although I would of course have used the metric system, I'll quote it here. Just replace the 1135 liter with 2650 liter, but the premise is the same.

"If your happy to contain an active predator that could grow anywhere from 3 to 4 feet in 300 gallons then go for it.
There are many other fish you could choose that a 300 would make a spacious comfortable home for. I would rather stock with fish that could move freely and be able to swim at full speed, something that i didn't grow to pity so much. At the end of the day its your call op. To buy a fish that gets to big for your aquarium with the attitude, it's probably better than what someone else would give it is ridiculous. Your just promoting the problem."

Now I think I've had enough with this thread.

Ngl bro you should stop looking at practical fish keeping and seriouslyfish or wtv. Doesn’t give realistic information and is teaching you nonsense tbh

 

[Caveden]

If anything ask the biggerthebetter. He has kept AND bred silver arowana for years. I’m sure he wouldn’t tell you they require a 25 feet long tank.
that tank size is literally bigger than my room.

he raised silver arowanas since they were young till adults for like 10 years plus, bred them, seen them thriving, has owned the largest monster fish there is out there. If he was the one telling me what adequate tank size is required, I of course would listen to him. He is one of the most experienced here, with tons of knowledge related to monster/ predatory fish (especially catfish).

related to catfish? I would listen to yellowcat, wednesday13 and thebiggerthebetter. Related to diseases and sickness? I would listen to kn04te, rocksor, tlindsey, deadeye. Related to stingrays? I would listen to matteus, gpdriftwood.

what you’re doing is reading off the internet on fish you have never kept before and giving the largest wild caught size there is, and giving the most absurd tank sizes.