Arowana

[Freshwater fish guy]

What size tank should they be in and are they illegal I az

 

[Jeremy S.]

They get huge. I would recommend a 250+ or something with plenty of surface for the fella to swim. Makes me miss my Arowana

 

[Wyomingite]

What size tank should they be in and are they illegal I az

The South American aros (silver aro, Osteoglossum bicirrhosum, and the black aro, Osteoglossum ferreirai) both can reach 48" in the wild, but usually don't get much over 36" in captivity. The Asian aro, Scleropages formosus (and various other "species" formerly under that species but not yet widely accepted in the scientific community) reaches similar sizes, but is illegal to own in the U.S. due to its Appendix 1 classification by CITES. The Australian aros, Scleropages jardinii and Scleropages leichardti , reach 28" and 36" respectively. AS far as I know, neither is restricted by federal or international regulations, but state law may restrict owning them. The African aro, Heterotis niloticus, can reach 42", and isn't regulated, either. Then of course there's the arapaima at 7' to 8' or so.

They are all large fish. Even a 6' tank really isn't appropriate for most, though ya often see 'em kept in 180 or 210 gallon tanks. The jardini is the only species which really should be kept in home aquariums, IMO, and then only in a 6' tank or larger.

WYite

 

[vanimal]

I have a 220 and plan on getting an Arowana. How big is your tank?

 

[Wyomingite]

I have a 220 and plan on getting an Arowana. How big is your tank?

That does not mean that it is in the best interest of the animal. I addressed the health concerns an aro in a 220 will be facing in your "Monster Tank" thread, vanimal. Housing an active, 3' fish in a 6' long tank that is only 2' wide is neither responsible nor does it constitute good husbandry practices. You'll be dealing with fin deformities, spinal curvature, scale curling, internal deformities, and possibly exopthalmy.

No matter how much it pains me, I can respect your decision to disregard my experience and advice for your own tank, thus I have not replied in that thread. However, I will not let slide the implication by association that a 180 or 220 constitutes proper housing simply because other hobbyists house their aros in that fashion. It is cruel and irresponsible. Unfortunately, a subculture within the hobby condones these practices.

One guideline I have both seen quoted and stated over the years is that a tank for any given species should be a minimum of least 4x the adult length of the fish long and 1.5x the adult length of the fish wide. 6x and 2x is much better, fish with more active lifestyles need more space, territoriality of a given species increases the required size, and realistically the larger the tank the better should be given for any and every species. The "larger the better" concept should be applied in all cases.

Whether an individual agrees with the exact guidelines above or not is actually irrelevant; the concept that there comes a point where a species should not be housed in a tank below a certain size is common sense. Every species has needs to be met. Too many people worry 'bout food and water quality but totally ignore the space requirements simply because they want to have a certain species.

WYite

 

[vanimal]

That does not mean that it is in the best interest of the animal. I addressed the health concerns an aro in a 220 will be facing in your "Monster Tank" thread, vanimal. Housing an active, 3' fish in a 6' long tank that is only 2' wide is neither responsible nor does it constitute good husbandry practices. You'll be dealing with fin deformities, spinal curvature, scale curling, internal deformities, and possibly exopthalmy.

No matter how much it pains me, I can respect your decision to disregard my experience and advice for your own tank, thus I have not replied in that thread. However, I will not let slide the implication by association that a 180 or 220 constitutes proper housing simply because other hobbyists house their aros in that fashion. It is cruel and irresponsible. Unfortunately, a subculture within the hobby condones these practices.

One guideline I have both seen quoted and stated over the years is that a tank for any given species should be a minimum of least 4x the adult length of the fish long and 1.5x the adult length of the fish wide. 6x and 2x is much better, fish with more active lifestyles need more space, territoriality of a given species increases the required size, and realistically the larger the tank the better should be given for any and every species. The "larger the better" concept should be applied in all cases.

Whether an individual agrees with the exact guidelines above or not is actually irrelevant; the concept that there comes a point where a species should not be housed in a tank below a certain size is common sense. Every species has needs to be met. Too many people worry 'bout food and water quality but totally ignore the space requirements simply because they want to have a certain species.

WYite

I have seen plenty in a much smaller tank than this and I thought Jars could work in a 220?

 

[Wyomingite]

I have seen plenty in a much smaller tank than this and I thought Jars could work in a 220?

As I said, just because they are housed in a smaller tank does not make it right. If ya did take my advice and are goin' with a jardini, then I'll back off. The last time I looked at your thread you were intent on a silver.

WYite

 

[vanimal]

As I said, just because they are housed in a smaller tank does not make it right. If ya did take my advice and are goin' with a jardini, then I'll back off. The last time I looked at your thread you were intent on a silver.

WYite

Yeah I'm trying to find the money and convince my parents to let me get a Jar. The only bad thing about them is that they cost 2.5 times more...

 

[Jeremy S.]

That does not mean that it is in the best interest of the animal. I addressed the health concerns an aro in a 220 will be facing in your "Monster Tank" thread, vanimal. Housing an active, 3' fish in a 6' long tank that is only 2' wide is neither responsible nor does it constitute good husbandry practices. You'll be dealing with fin deformities, spinal curvature, scale curling, internal deformities, and possibly exopthalmy.

No matter how much it pains me, I can respect your decision to disregard my experience and advice for your own tank, thus I have not replied in that thread. However, I will not let slide the implication by association that a 180 or 220 constitutes proper housing simply because other hobbyists house their aros in that fashion. It is cruel and irresponsible. Unfortunately, a subculture within the hobby condones these practices.

One guideline I have both seen quoted and stated over the years is that a tank for any given species should be a minimum of least 4x the adult length of the fish long and 1.5x the adult length of the fish wide. 6x and 2x is much better, fish with more active lifestyles need more space, territoriality of a given species increases the required size, and realistically the larger the tank the better should be given for any and every species. The "larger the better" concept should be applied in all cases.

Whether an individual agrees with the exact guidelines above or not is actually irrelevant; the concept that there comes a point where a species should not be housed in a tank below a certain size is common sense. Every species has needs to be met. Too many people worry 'bout food and water quality but totally ignore the space requirements simply because they want to have a certain species.

WYite

+100

And if you're inexperienced and having to ask your parents to have one and don't have the money then I would not suggest an Arowana. I had one in the past and they are very sensitive animals that require your utmost attention. Remember these things are living animals and not just something pretty to look at.

I would recommend looking at some of the smaller Gar species if you don't have much experience with Arowana.

 

[vanimal]

+100

And if you're inexperienced and having to ask your parents to have one and don't have the money then I would not suggest an Arowana. I had one in the past and they are very sensitive animals that require your utmost attention. Remember these things are living animals and not just something pretty to look at.

I would recommend looking at some of the smaller Gar species if you don't have much experience with Arowana.

I'm pretty good at caring for fish I already own a BGK and Fire Eel and my water is always perfect. I'm pretty sure I have the pickiest Eel ever because for months all he would take was Ghost shrimp. That gets expensive and annoying but now he takes market shrimp. And I'm pretty sure if I can keep those alive I can take care of an Arow. And besides the only way to gain experience is by owning one. I know the proper diet and water quality so I'm ready to take a step up. The only reason I wouldn't be able to get one would be the cost I do all the work on my tank myself. Thanks to people on here, YouTube, and other sites I've done my research and I know I'm ready to own one.

 

[vanimal]

When I do get my Jar (not for a while though) what would be the best tank mate for an arowana?

 

[Jeremy S.]

From my experience not corydoras! When mine would go up to fill their swim bladders my Arowana would just plain eat them.

I would recommend bottom dwellers

 

[vanimal]

From my experience not corydoras! When mine would go up to fill their swim bladders my Arowana would just plain eat them.

I would recommend bottom dwellers

Lol it's pretty obvious they must be kept with fish that can't fit in their mouth. Poor Cories.

 

[vanimal]

From my experience not corydoras! When mine would go up to fill their swim bladders my Arowana would just plain eat them.

I would recommend bottom dwellers

What size tank did you have? And I have observed that they go well with larger cichlids and catfish.

 

[Jeremy S.]

I had mine in a 250g and it was just a baby lol

 

[vanimal]

I had mine in a 250g and it was just a baby lol

What happened to it? I have heard of a lot of them jumping out of tanks.

 

[vanimal]

I just read that the minimum for a Jardini is a 220.

 

[Jeremy S.]

I eventually sold the tank and traded the Arowana in to a LFS

 

[vanimal]

I eventually sold the tank and traded the Arowana in to a LFS

Why wanted something smaller?

 

[Jeremy S.]

Eventually had to many tanks and some stuff had to go so I could move. I eventually went over to saltwater also. I wish I still had the tank :/