Saturating the sky with artificial light not only prevents people from stargazing but it also affects wildlife and can harm people’s sleep patterns, experts are warning.

Campaigners say they are not against illuminating buildings and streets at night, as it often makes people feel safe and can act as a deterrent against crime, but they want to cut out needless artificial lighting.

Martin Whipp, secretary of the York Astronomical Society, said that people and organisations simply did not think of the impact of pointing lighting towards the sky.

Not all lights are a problem, just those that waste energy by beaming some or all of their glare upwards.

“I do not want people to turn their lights off I just want them turned downwards instead of upwards,” he added.

Mr Whipp warns the issue isn’t simply one of not being able to see the stars it is also a problem which can affect wildlife.

“It can affect the nocturnal habits of various animals, feeding patterns and migration patterns.

“It can affect quite a lot of species.

“If you are a barn owl you can only hunt in the night and if your prey can see you because the sky is lit up you are actually at a disadvantage because they can see you.”

A star count held this year by the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) and the British Astronomical Association’s Campaign for Dark Skies, showed half the population cannot see many stars because of light pollution.

Around 53 per cent of those who joined in failed to see more than 10 stars in the Orion constellation – an indicator of severe pollution. That had decreased only very slightly from 54 per cent since 2007.

Lighting can also harm sleep patterns. In 2010, 83 per cent of those taking part in a CPRE survey said their view of the night sky was affected by light pollution.

Of those affected, almost half said their sleep had also been disrupted by excessive artificial lighting.

Studies have shown how the impact of the problem in the Yorkshire region.

In 2000 CPRE revealed satellite data which showed the scale of the problem in the county – showing only 11 per cent of skies were dark.

The data, when compared with that from 1993, showed light pollution increased 28 per in the region between 1993 and 2000, a greater increase than the national average.

While the amount of light-saturated area didn’t change over those years, East Yorkshire lost half of its truly dark night time area while North Yorkshire lost more than at third of its truly dark area. South Yorkshire and West Yorkshire both lost all of their land classed as being in the middle ground between dark and saturated.

Campaigners argue that dimming street lights, switching them off overnight, and replacing old street lighting can all reduce the impact. But the issue is controversial with recent decisions by local authorities to switch off lights at night sometimes sparking criticism and raising fears crime levels will increase.

Earlier this year the Yorkshire Post revealed councils across the region were considering plans which could see more than 40,000 lights switched off overnight while others were dimming lights to cut energy bills.

Some local authorities are replacing old street lamps and other glaring lights with more energy efficient versions.

Mr Whipp added he hoped light pollution would start to lessen: “I would like to think that we have reached a point where enough new developments are taking it into account that hopefully it will start getting better.”

The Government’s National Planning Policy Framework aims to reduce light pollution, by encouraging good design and using planning policies and decisions to control lighting.

Robert Massey, deputy executive secretary at the Royal Astronomical Society, said it was too early to tell what the impact would be but he said responsibility was also going to have to fall on developers.

Emma Marrington, rural policy campaigner with CPRE said there needed to be a change in mindsets and it was important to realise glaring lights were not always needed or else something precious may be lost.

“All too often we hear poor excuses for bad or excessive lighting,” she said. “Of course we need the right, well-designed lighting in the right places – and some areas need to be lit for safety reasons – but there should not be a blanket assumption that glaring lights are needed.”