Alternatives A and B apply interim management to the 20 eligible waterway segments and associated waterway corridors to preserve their free-flowing characteristics, ORVs, and characteristics that justified their tentative classifications; Alternative B also recommends all of these waterways to Congress as suitable for inclusion the NWSRS. In contrast, under alternatives C and D, the BLM does not recommend any of these eligible waterways to Congress as suitable for inclusion in the NWSRS and therefore does not apply interim management to preserve their ORVs and free-flowing characteristics. The preservation of any ORVs or other WSR-related qualities identified in the waterway segments would be least effective under alternatives C and D due to the greater intensity of resource uses allowed under these alternatives. Alternatives B and A, respectively, are the most protective of WSR eligible waterway segments and would result in the greatest beneficial impacts to the free-flowing characteristics, ORVs, and characteristics that justified their tentative classifications as wild, scenic, or recreational waterways by restricting or limiting resource uses that could degrade these qualities. Due to the extent and intensity of the restrictions under Alternative B, the beneficial impacts to the WSR-related qualities and the adverse impacts to other activities and resource uses would be greatest under this alternative. Alternatives C and D, respectively, include the least restrictive management of several resource uses and would have the fewest adverse impacts on mineral development, livestock grazing, and timber harvesting.