Interactive Genetic Algorithms (IGA) are advanced human-in-the-loop optimization methods that enable humans to give feedback, based on their subjective and unquantified preferences and knowledge, during the algorithm's search process. While these methods are gaining popularity in multiple fields, there is a critical lack of data and analyses on (a) the nature of interactions of different humans with interfaces of decision support systems (DSS) that employ IGA in water resources planning problems and on (b) the effect of human feedback on the algorithm's ability to search for design alternatives desirable to end-users. In this paper, we present results and analyses of observational experiments in which different human participants (surrogates and stakeholders) interacted with an IGA-based, watershed DSS called WRESTORE to identify plans of conservation practices in a watershed. The main goal of this paper is to evaluate how the IGA adapts its search process in the objective space to a user's feedback, and identify whether any similarities exist in the objective space of plans found by different participants. Some participants focused on the entire watershed, while others focused only on specific local subbasins. Additionally, two different hydrology models were used to identify any potential differences in interactive search outcomes that could arise from differences in the numerical values of benefits displayed to participants. Results indicate that stakeholders, in comparison to their surrogates, were more likely to use multiple features of the DSS interface to collect information before giving feedback, and dissimilarities existed among participants in the objective space of design alternatives.