Situation: Effects of urbanization of Bangalore are presented, and according to opponents, the efforts of restoration of some lakes by local governing bodies is not effective.
Reasoning: We need to find a statement that weakens the argument of the opponents, i.e. a statement that negates the opponent’s concerns over restoration efforts by local bodies.
(A) Incorrect: The efforts required in the restoration of a destroyed lake compared to maintaining an intact lake is not related to this argument.
(B) Incorrect: The economic class of opponents does not weaken the opponent’s argument.
(C) Incorrect: This argument is about the restoration of destroyed lakes, but it is not related to the central idea of the argument. Moreover, it is not possible "to restore biological diversity" if the remaining lakes are not suitable for reproduction. Therefore, it cannot weaken the opponent`s position.
(D) Correct: This option weakens the opponent’s position as it presents a reason why lakes should be restored. The restoration is justified as intact lakes cannot provide an appropriate habitat for the reproduction of native fish.
(E) Incorrect: The role of governing construction in the restoration of lakes is not related to this argument. The idea of passing suitable laws for governing construction is an external idea. If anything, this data slightly strengthens the article.