The question is a strengthen the argument type of question.
The conclusion of the argument is the suggestion made by the leaders to provide irrigation to nearby lands and otherwise subdivide many of the tributaries branching off from the country’s main river.
The suggestion has been made to prevent a recurrence of the previous year’s floods. The passage also states that the leaders have made the suggestion despite knowing that the most amount of damage is caused by the flooding of the
main river, and
not the tributaries.
By paying close attention to the last sentence of the passage, we see that there is information that may weaken the leaders’ plan.
In order to strengthen the plan, we need either an option that shows that the plan is a sound one or an option that shows that any possible weak link in the supporting information is actually not a weak link.
That is what Option E does. The last sentence of the passage indicates a possible weak link in the plan, but the information provided in Option E tells us that this plan, instead of increasing the flooding, will mitigate the bigger cause of the flooding, which is the flooding of the main river.
Option A discusses cost and is also a negative statement, so it doesn’t strengthen the plan.
Option B very clearly weakens the plan. The passage tells us that the plan, if instituted, will increase the capacities of the tributaries. Option B states that if the banks of the tributaries are not maintained, there could be flooding. So, Option B shows that the plan could be counterproductive, since the idea is to prevent flooding.
Option C gives an alternative plan, thereby weakening the leaders’ plan in a roundabout way.
Option D doesn’t discuss the plan. Instead, it gives us information about something that is only vaguely related to the passage. So, Option D is also incorrect.
Therefore, E is the best option.
Jayanthi Kumar.