How dark is your sky? A precise answer to this question is useful for comparing observing sites and, more important, for determining whether a site is dark enough to let you push your eyes, telescope, or camera to their theoretical limits. Likewise, you need accurate criteria for judging sky conditions when documenting unusual or borderline observations, such as an extremely long comet tail, a faint aurora, or subtle features in galaxies.

On Internet bulletin boards and newsgroups I see many postings from beginners (and sometimes more experienced observers) wondering how to evaluate the quality of their skies. Unfortunately, most of today's stargazers have never observed under a truly dark sky, so they lack a frame of reference for gauging local conditions. Many describe observations made at "very dark" sites, but from the descriptions it's clear that the sky must have been only moderately dark. Most amateurs today cannot get to a truly dark location within reasonable driving distance. Thus, upon finding a semirural observing site where stars of magnitude 6.0 to 6.3 are marginally apparent to the unaided eye, they believe they have located an observing Nirvana!

Thirty years ago one could find truly dark skies within an hour's drive of major population centers. Today you often need to travel 150 miles or more. In my own observing career I have watched the extent to which ever-growing light pollution has sullied the heavens. In years long past I witnessed nearly pristine skies from parts of the highly urbanized northeastern United States. This is no longer possible.

Limiting Magnitude Isn't Enough

Amateur astronomers usually judge their skies by noting the magnitude of the faintest star visible to the naked eye. However, naked-eye limiting magnitude is a poor criterion. It depends too much on a person's visual acuity (sharpness of eyesight), as well as on the time and effort expended to see the faintest possible stars. One person's "5.5-magnitude sky" is another's "6.3-magnitude sky." Moreover, deep-sky observers need to assess the visibility of both stellar and nonstellar objects. A modest amount of light pollution degrades diffuse objects such as comets, nebulae, and galaxies far more than stars.

To help observers judge the true darkness of a site, I have created a nine-level scale. It is based on nearly 50 years of observing experience. I hope it will prove both enlightening and useful to observers — though it may stun or even horrify some! Should it come into wide use, it would provide a consistent standard for comparing observations. Researchers would also be better able to assess the plausibility of an unusual or marginal observation. All around, it could be a boon to those of us who regularly scan the heavens.