Step 1: Understanding the situation.
The argument presents a situation where avalanches have decreased in the Sordellian Mountains. To explain this decrease, we need evidence that shows the planning changes that helped prevent avalanches.
Step 2: Analyzing the options.
- (A) This provides a scenario for avalanche timing but doesn’t explain the decrease.
- (B) While this is true, it doesn’t explain the reduction in people caught in avalanches.
- (C) This is the correct answer. Better information about avalanche-prone areas would help prevent construction in those areas, leading to fewer people being caught in avalanches.
- (D) This doesn’t address the core issue of safety and avalanche prevention.
- (E) This might increase avalanche risk, but doesn’t address how planning led to fewer people being caught in avalanches.
Step 3: Conclusion.
The correct answer is (C), as it explains how better planning and information could have reduced the risk of avalanches.