Beijing and its neighbouring Hebei Province are lucky to have some of the Great Wall's most famous and popular sections in their territories.

They should have done everything in their capacity to make sure these parts of the wall are maintained well, not only out of responsibility for one of our nation's most precious cultural landmarks, but also as pragmatic concern for a major local source of tourism revenue.

But the latest conflict between the Great Wall management authorities of Beijing's Miyun County and Luanping County of Hebei Province, which reportedly resulted in five physical injuries, exposed the ugly truth behind local authorities' enthusiasm for jurisdiction over the wall.

For years, the two counties have butted heads over who should be the legitimate caretaker of the 1,000-metre stretch of the wall. But the dispute has little, if anything, to do with preservation work. Instead, it has been a war for profits.

Those travelling between the Simatai (in Miyun) and Jinshanling, (in Luanping) sections of the wall - two popular alternatives to the more accessible but crowded Badaling section - may be charged twice if they make a cross-border trip. Each county wants to collect an entrance fee.

Worse than the unfair charge on travellers is the suffering of the Great Wall itself - the 1,000-metre stretch, where many wall bricks carry rare inscriptions, is left unattended as a de facto buffer zone between the two counties. Neither party wants to see the stretch taken care of by the other for fear that maintenance may justify jurisdiction.

It is even more unsettling to learn this is only one of many such scuffles over jurisdiction of the Great Wall.

We do not know exactly how long the wall is, and will not find out until the State Administration of Cultural Heritage completes its first-ever attempt to present an authoritative answer to that question.

For now, the only thing we are sure of is that the landmark is in a constant state of deterioration, thanks to aging and human activities.

Aging is irreversible. The only thing we can do is to prolong the natural wearing-down process through careful maintenance.

It is a shame if government authorities indulge in protracted foot-dragging while NGO's and individual volunteers plunge into a desperate fight to safeguard the pride of our nation, and part of this country's cultural identity.

Local authorities there are obligated to always  put China's cultural heritage before local interest.