Isn't the Fisheries meeting really targeted toward commercial fishing zone management? I am not aware of any specific Atlantic coastal zones where sportsmen harvest by hook and line would have population impact, although as a whole it has a huge impact. Commercial fishing would be another matter altogether, zone management would be very appropriate if coordinated with fish behavior and habitat. Zone restrictions like the offshore banks make all the difference in the world and are a big part of keeping the stocks abundant.
I would be 100% in favor of no-fishing zones provided they are imposed on cornerstone forage species like menhaden. I would support them 100% for sport angling if they were applied to known sportfishing impact areas, but I can't think of any (ocean) areas of that nature. There are really no distinct zones where angler impact can be localized, but there are many zones where commercial harvest can be identified as key:
North Sea sand eel fishery. Menhaden fisheries - albeit not really localized. Striped Bass netting in Chesapeake and Hudson Rivers. Open seas salmon netting in the Greenland fishing grounds.
Looking beyond coastal areas, any exploitation of anadromous fishes at dams, waterfalls, shipping locks, etc - are capable of major damage to specific populations by anglers. We should levy restrictions on these areas for sportsmen wherever possible. In many cases we already do.
Once again, as a whole sportsmen have a big impact especially in MA but within localized areas it would achieve nothing. Zone mgmt is for commercial fisheries, broad ranging rules are best for sportsmen - like an inter-coastal mgmt system. This would be best managed by the Federal authorities IMHO. In fact, I feel that the root of the problem is that state governments can't get their act together and need an intervening authority.