The number of pollinators has been reported to be decreasing for the past several decades. Numerous sources (e.g., climate change, pesticides, loss of habitat) have been noted as potential contributing factors to the decline. With respect to the green industry, the impact of pesticides on pollinator decline and consumer response to this impact is of critical importance. Although no definitive link exists of pesticides being a major contributing factor to pollinator decline, some retailers have banned their suppliers from using certain pesticides. As various sources (e.g., universities, media, activist groups) provide information (both positive, neutral, and negative) about the impact of pesticides on pollinators, no information exists regarding how consumers value such information. Using a sample of Connecticut consumers, this study evaluates how both information source and information type impact a consumer’s decision to purchase pollinator-friendly plants in the future. The study finds that consumers exposed to either neutral (no link between pesticides and pollinator decline) or negative (link between pesticides and pollinator decline) information from universities and major media outlets indicate they will purchase more pollinator-friendly plants compared with the no information (control) treatment. The results show that information from the federal government, nursery/greenhouse industry associations, and environmental activist groups have the same impact on self-reported future pollinator-friendly plant purchasing as the no information group.